Datasets:

huuuyeah

/

meetingbank

like 7

Rezones 620 West 1st Avenue and a portion of 90 Galapago Street from U-RH-2.5 to I-MX-3 in Council District 7. (NEIGHBORHOODS AND PLANNING) Rezones 620 West 1st Avenue and a portion of 90 Galapago Street from U-RH-2.5 (Urban, Row House, 2.5 stories) to I-MX-3 (Industrial, Mixed-Use, 3 stories) in Council District 7. IF ORDERED PUBLISHED, A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD ON THIS ITEM. REFER TO THE "PENDING" SECTION OF THE FUTURE COUNCIL MEETING AGENDAS FOR THE DATE. The Committee approved filing this bill at its meeting on 9-2-15.

DenverCityCouncil_10122015_15-0615

There's not a specific development proposal here, and if nothing else, this slide will really explain why they're here before you. Tonight has to do with a parcel line adjustment that was done since the time of zoning in 2010. So before with the map that's on the left, it shows how the parcels were previously split with 90 Galapagos being A to the West and 620 West first being be to the east. After that time, the then owner adjusted the parcel line through an assessment, through assessment and sold parts of the parcel separately but did not do a zone lot line adjustment with it with the Development Services Department. So what happened was it changed the parcel lines which are shown in red to what you see on the right hand side afterward today. So a is 90 Galapagos and includes the surface parking that goes all the way to the alley b is 620 west first avenue includes the four unit residential and surface parking behind it, but the zone lot lines remain the way they were before. So what? So the result is that on the parcel A that one parcel owned by one owner is actually split into two zone lots at one part, one zone lot, and then a portion of another zone . What if they were to rezone? They could do a zone lot amendment to conform their zone. Lots to their parcel lines would be separate from each other, but because the area marked and B to the east is zoned for 2.5, it has a minimum zone lot area of 6000 square feet. So in the urban rowhouse 2.5 story zone district, there's a minimum lot area and they cannot amend. There's a lot below the minimum allowed in the zone district. If they were to rezone to a different district that didn't have that minimum lot area, they could amend their zone lot and then be separate from each other. And so that's why they're here requesting to rezone the property. A And on all of the rest of this half block are already zoned. IMX three has the industrial mixed use three storey zone district. The requesting to rezone the B portion of the property into that same IMX three zone district that the rest of the half block already serves. And and importantly, the IMX three zone district does not have a minimum zone lot size. So if they if this rezoning were approved, they could then amend their zone lot to conform to their current parcel boundaries, be separate from each other for zoning purposes, and not have to need the other's permission for coming in and getting his own permit to build a fence or whatever they may do in the future on the property. Again, there's no current development proposal. The IMAX three zone district does allow industrial, commercial and residential uses up to three stories in height. There are also protected district standards in the building form standards that relate to this property because it is adjacent to the yards, 2.5 to the east. So here's a map of of that zoning. Already you can see the balance of the half block IMX three to the east and to the north is that urban real house 2.5 zone district. As you move further to the west, closer to the railroad tracks, it grows in industrial character, stepping up to IMX five on the map and then into our more general and heavy industrial districts. As you move further to the west and south to the north and east is a solidly residential rowhouse neighborhood. There also is on the Galapagos Street block, some old code zoning that's similar in nature in terms of allowing commercial mixed uses. If you look at the existing use pattern, again to the north and east, it's pretty solidly residential. As you move south and west, you find some office and commercial and industrial mixed in with multi-unit residential. Terms of building form and scale, this area is generally 1 to 3 stories in scale. You can see the the photo two at the top shows some two story homes located east of the subject property. The subject property is shown in the middle photo. That's the two storey four unit building that's there. The lower photo shows the one storey 90 scale office and to the right are three storey multi-unit residential that have been built just to the south. So in terms of process, this application began about four months ago and we provide a notice of receipt of the application on June the first at a planning board public hearing in August, proceeded to Neighborhoods and Planning Committee on September 2nd and has its final public hearing tonight. For public comments. We received only one on this application that was received from the Baker Historic Neighborhood Association Register Neighborhood Organization, who had a meeting of their full general membership, voted to recommend approval of this application, and no other comments have been received. The Planning Board held a public hearing on August 19th to consider this application and after testimony from the applicant, the unanimously recommended its approval. So I'll, I'll browse through the five review criteria which do apply. The first is consistency with adopted plans. We have comp plan 2000. We have Blueprint Denver. And importantly, there's a small area plan adopted since the time of Blueprint Denver, the 23 Baker Neighborhood Plan. So first, turning to the citywide comp plan 2000, as we've explained in further detail in the staff report, we do find it's consistent with many of the strategies in comp plan 2000, including enabling and promoting mixed use development, encouraging quality infill development in a way that's compatible with surrounding character of the neighborhoods. So we find it consistent with that plan. Blueprint Denver, adopted in 2002, identified a different plan direction than the later Baker Neighborhood Plan in 2000 to identify this entire block as single family duplex, which are areas moderately dense and primarily residential, but with some complementary small scale commercial and in it identified this area as an area of stability where the goal is to identify and maintain the character of the area. You can see the Blueprint Denver map. I created the the transition from stable residential to area of change, industrial and employment and mixed use right along Galapagos Street. Both of the streets at issue here are residential in nature. First Avenue's a collector street Galapagos and designated local. But the 23 Baker Neighborhood Plan provided a refined direction from the direction that we had previously had in Blueprint Denver. So the site here is shown in the yellow dashed line and the heavy blue dash is the historic district again. But you can see in the Baker Neighborhood Plan that the direction for both area of change, stability and for land use has changed. So it following the small area planning process it was the neighborhood in the in the area plan adopted by council identified that both sides of galloping go would be an area of change comprised of residential and office and a blend of uses from the residential area, which is the yellow area to the solidly industrial area, the blue area to the west. So in both respects, the Baker Neighborhood Plan changed the area of change designation as well as the land use designation supporting a mix of residential and office on both sides of Gallup ago, which is reflected in the current zoning. The goals articulated for that area of change directly address this this rezoning request. Again, it's about creating a logical change between the residential to the east and the heavier industrial to the West, providing a range of office and residential uses that allow property owners flexibility over time. It does specifically call for reinvestment in the light industrial and commercial properties in this area, and that we should support rezoning applications that allow for a mix of uses. So all these goals from the Baker Hood Neighborhood Plan in 2003 were pointing to a solution that we have on the books today, like our IMX three industrial mixed use, three storey zone district. So we do think the application is consistent with the Baker Neighborhood Plan. It also would be uniform in its respect to rate district regulations as as the same regulations would apply as they do to other annex three zoned districts. And it furthers the public health, safety and welfare, primarily through the implementation of the city's adopted plans. Here, the change that just provides a justifying circumstance for the rezoning is the change of an ownership that's resulted in the current situation that the property owners have with the split zone. Zone lot, as well as recent development on Galapagos Street, has actually reinforced the character as identified in the Baker Neighborhood Plan, with three storey residential and mixed use development that that all support that this kind of continuation of the rest of the half block in the IMX three zone district. So we do find that there's a justifying a circumstance for the rezoning. And then turning to consistency with the neighborhood context zone, district purpose and intent statements. The IMX districts are designed for a more urban context where you have a rectangular street grid and to provide a transition from mixed use in I.A. and IP areas while accommodating a variety of uses. And then specifically IMX three is for an area for with local or collector streets and where three stories is desired. And really, this this area seems like the perfect fit for that kind of a context, description and zone district purpose in intent statements because it already contains that mix of uses. Three stories is the character of the area and there's already IMX three zoning on the rest of the block. So we do think that the site and the rezoning request are consistent with those statements. And so having reviewed against all five criteria, we find that all have been met and the staff recommends approval. Thank you. We have one speaker, Enrico Cascio. Good evening, Mr. President, and council board members. I mean, there is there is very little I can add, really, given this very comprehensive presentation that I did. I mean, I think what I like to stress is that really for us, the need is is to to to be able to get these two owners to not be dependent on on each other. And that was the main reason why we we started this process. I'm not really fully understanding how much work it was going to entail. But so, I mean, I'll be really happy to address any question you may have otherwise if if there are no questions that I would kindly ask you to, to support this request. Thank you. All right. Now time for questions from members of council. Any questions from members of council? Councilman Espinosa. Just for you, Councilman Brooks, I would like to speak to Tim. Or not. Tim. Abe. So I'll. Keep going. You'll get it. Right? Right. See, it's not just you, Kyle. The what is the minimum? And this is sort of not relevant. But you said there is no minimum zone lot for I am x three. What is the minimum lot sizes in order to reason time x three? There's no minimum area to Arizona. Wow. So a two by two square foot I mean a four foot square foot parcel could be mean. A zone like could be created and imx three. That's theoretically possible. That's right. Yeah. You know, in this case, there wouldn't be a minimum even if there were a minimum, because they're zoning to the center near adjacent to the minimums wouldn't apply. Even if there would be if. There wasn't, there would be the 6000 square foot or what is there? There's no minimum. There is no minimum for the mixed use districts. No, I'm asking that because that it's a flexible zone district and it's something that I might want to consider elsewhere. Then the last one. You referenced the change in ownership as sort of the Article 12 trigger for change of conditions. That is not a hardship in the eyes of the Board of Adjustment, but it is a hardship in the eyes of CPD because, I mean, where does due diligence in that process sort of play into play a role at this level? So yeah, the change in ownership is one of the justifying circumstances that we identified, one of the changes that we found that apply to this property. A rezoning does not have to meet the hardship criteria of a variance. And so it it's not the same as the hardship that a board of adjustment can. I'm just saying that because you didn't state it in your testimony, but it was the word hardship in the connection with this change of ownership as a hardship was in the presentation. Sure. Yeah, yeah. The property owners definitely are experiencing this as a hardship as it makes it difficult for them to do work. It's not the same as needing to meet the hardship criteria for a variance in the code though. Okay. Yeah. Thanks. Thank you, Councilman Espinosa. Councilman Flynn. Thank you, Mr. President. Kyle. Just a quick question. I saw in the presentation that Baker has started Neighborhood Association voted to support this. No other comments were received, but I didn't see anywhere in here what other neighborhood associations were notified of this. Are there any other nos other than ANC and Denver Neighborhood Association that cover this particular area and were they notified? Sure, yeah. All of the registered neighborhood organizations that claim territory within 200 feet of the property were notified 21 days in advance of this hearing, as well as the other hearings and public meetings. So in addition to ANC and the Denver Neighborhood Association, the Baker Historic Neighborhood Association, Santa Fe, Santa Fe Drive Redevelopment Corporation, and the Denver Urban Resident Association, which is a new citywide organization, were all notified. Thank you. That's all. Thank you, councilman flynn. Catherine that follows you back up. Kyle, while you're up here. I do want to apologize to you directly because as soon as I'm sort of reflecting on like I have two Baltimore pictures flashing in my head, I'm like, there's no resemblance that I'm very sorry for for uttering their name. So thank you so much. Thank you, Catherine. Any other questions? CNN public hearing is now closed. Time for comments. This is in seven. So this is this is it. We had council Councilman Clark. It says Brooks on the script. I knew that wasn't right. Councilman Clark. Thank you, Mr. President. You know, I think this. Thank you for the presentation. I think this clearly meets the criteria for a rezoning and also cleans up our zoning in this area and provides these homeowners with the opportunity to exercise their right as homeowners to act independent of one another. And so for that, I will definitely be supporting this tonight. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilman Clark. Councilman Espinosa. I just wanted to. I spared my colleagues the sort of my comments on the last rezoning. But on this one, I just wanted to sort of emphasize that this is a this is a 40 a pretty flexible zone district with some pretty interesting development requirements next to a protected zone district across the alley. And and with the sort of combination of what they're asking for and the small area plan that's in place, this is sort of, to me, an example of when it when all the things that are in place to sort of support a rezoning without a sort of future plan, this is this is this is how it in my humble opinion, it should be done. Bank Accounts mechanism. Any other comments? 615 as amended. Scene? None. Madam Secretary. Roll Call. Clerk I. Espinosa. I. Flynn, I. Gilmore, I. Cashman I can eat. Lopez. I knew Ortega. Sussman Black eye. Brooks. I miss Mr. President. Hi. Madam Secretary, please, for the vote in the results. 3939 615 as amended has passed no pre adjournment announcement seen no other business before this body. This meeting is adjourned. Denver eight TV's Your City, Your Source. Denver eight. On TV and online. To stay connected to your community, your city, your source.

Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by amending Sections 2.01.380 and 2.01.1020 relating to officeholder accounts, read and adopted as read. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_02032015_15-0062

Communication from City Attorney Recommendation to Declare Ordinance Amending the Long Beach Municipal Code relating to office holder counts reading read and adopted as read citywide. Councilwoman Gonzalez. Okay. Just wanted to say thank you to my council colleagues. I know we had a healthy discussion about this particular item now that it's here. I just wish to move forward with with the motion. There's just. There's a second by Councilmember Ringa. Any public comment on the item? Please, sir, calm down. Larry. Good you click as the address if I'm downtown if the correct me if this is not the item that last week there was the discussion of considerable very vibrant discussion relative to procedure and whether or not it was. Plus proper to discuss at length. An item that had already come back from a previous recess before was in a committee thoroughly debated and then came back to the council and there was a if this is the one, there was a mindset of some on the council that, well, since it's already been discussed, it's not appropriate to open up for discussion or amendments or additions or changes. And I thoroughly support the concept of what was done with that. In the final analysis of having that open discussion that the people that some people on the commission on the Council did not want. And I think that's a cultural thing that they've got to wean themselves away from. For the past eight or nine years, almost the mantra was, Well, we'll discuss it once. I mean, Uncle Bob set the schedule. This is what it's going to be, lip flap if you want, but it doesn't make any difference when it comes back . We'll just rubber stamped it and go forward. That is not the way government should work. And the people and I believe it was Councilwoman Pryce that led that charge, if this is the item that when something comes back, just because it's been through a committee does not mean that it's automatically rubber stamped. The warranty of your office requires you to air it and vet it. To its fullest extent. Thank you. Thank you, sir. SINGH and no other public comment there. The item is up for a vote. There's a second by Councilmember Turanga. Please go and cast your votes. Motion passes five three. Next item is item 17 and 18, I think. Mr. City Attorney, do these have to be taken separately or.

Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary to enter into an agreement with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (CalOES) Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP), to accept and expend grant funding in amount of $702,823, and execute all documents necessary to implement the grant for the City of Long Beach Pump Station Mitigation Project, Phase One (Project); Increase appropriations in the Capital Projects Fund Group (Capital Projects Grant Fund) in the Public Works Department by $702,823, offset by grant reimbursement funds from the FEMA CalOES HMGP, for the Project; and Increase appropriations in the Capital Projects Fund Group (Capital Projects Fund) in the Public Works Department by $702,823, offset by a transfer of FEMA CalOES HMGP grant reimbursement revenues from the Capital Grant Fund. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_02012022_22-0114

Thank you. Let's go ahead and keep moving on the agenda. Item 27 for you. Report from Public Works. Recommendation to enter into an agreement with FEMA to accept. Grant funding in an. Amount of 702,823 for. The City of Long Beach. Pump Station Mitigation Project. Phase one. Citywide. Can I get a motion in a second, please? Emotional breakdowns and bizarro world country rank. Is there any public comment? If there's any members of the public who wish to speak on this item, please press star nine or use a written function. Dave Shuker. You have the floor. Oh, I'm good. Thank you. That concludes public comment. Roll call the district one. So as. District two. I. District three. I. District four. I. District five. By District six. I. District seven. I. District eight. A motion is carried. In district nine. I'm sorry, district nine. I'm so sorry. District nine, as in I received motion is carried.

Recommendation to adopt ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by amending Section 1.27.010 School Board Districts established; declaring the urgency thereof; and declaring that this ordinance shall take effect immediately, read and adopt as read. (Citywide) (Emergency Ordinance No. ORD-21-0041)

LongBeachCC_01042022_21-1303

The motion is carried. Thank you. Next up is item 40. Item 14, report from City Attorney and Report from City Clerk. Recommendation to adopt ordinance amending the Lombard Municipal Code by amending school board districts. Establish declaring the urgency thereof and declared that this ordinance no take effect immediately read and adopted as read citywide. Thank you. There's a motion and a second. I do believe there's public comment. Dave Shukla. Here's the issue. As I stated at the last meeting in December evening, it meant that a 12 year old can understand a independently of LP with d uh keep me keep making. I kept making redistricting maps. And I'd like to to point out, not only do I support this motion and support what he did with their map , but that if we'd had it, if he'd had an expert so called, uh, contracted for us, they clearly would have hit upon the same kind of logic that will be widely used to not overreach across the signal hill boundary and specifically over a temple street. For anyone who's interested, I was never interested myself in making the map, the redistricting map for the council districts of Long Beach, where I was interested in. Ah. Uh, the reason why we didn't just do the obvious thing, which was make historical Cambodia town as whole as possible, given the one chance we had with that aging population and why we didn't just use Temple Street the way the zip code map does, the way the city council district map used to and why we didn't doing the exact same weeks. We're not only are we getting an infrastructure bill passed for the first time, but some of those crucial components of that infrastructure bill are electrical vehicle charging stations. And where those charging stations are matter. It matters to Southern California Edison, for instance, for a kind of refilling of their existing assets. It matters for the rest of everyone else to not have a grid that is centralized around the wrong things. So there are major questions not only about our physical infrastructure, but about who owns and who controls them. And we don't have the time space to even begin to scratch the surface of them because, you know, frankly, I to come here and, you know, sit through our long redistricting meetings, they don't go anywhere because there seems to be an agenda in. And I would gladly sit here for a minute and just stare at you, if that's what it takes. It's really, really unfortunate. School board believed in itself and in the students and people of this city. Why didn't the Independent Redistricting Commission, why didn't the city manager's office and the consultant working with them? Why didn't you believe the people of the city? To do it themselves. I was sitting here each week making a map, making another map, people that do it themselves. I'm not the only one. Why don't you believe in essentially do it right. But you're going to you're going to represent us in Washington, yet you're running. Roberts running. Thank you. That concludes public comment for more than 40 members, including Castro votes.

A bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification for 2100 South Cherry Street, 4500 East Evans Avenue, and a portion of 2135 South Cherry Street in University Hills. Approves an official map amendment to rezone properties located at 2100 and 2135 South Cherry Street and 4500 Evans Avenue from C-MX-5 to C-MX-8 (urban center, mixed-use, 5 stories to urban center, mixed-use 8 stories) in Council District 4. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 10-8-19.

DenverCityCouncil_11182019_19-1008

Hours. 12 hours. Council Resolution 11 zero six has been adopted. Council is now reconvened and Council will resume its regular session. Council can it will you please put Council Bill 1008 on the floor? Yes, Mr. President. I move that council bill 19, dash 1009 be placed upon final consideration and do pass. I think we're on 1008 and I missed one 1008 first. Yes. 19 desk ten await be placed in my final consideration and do pass. Thank you. It has been moved and seconded. Public hearing for Council Bill 1008 is now open. May we have the staff report? Thank you, Mr. President. And Council Scott Robinson with Community Planning and Development. I got the PowerPoint up on the screen, please. Thank you. So this is a request to rezone 2120 135 South Cherry Street and 4500 Evans Avenue from C five to see Annex the property is located in Council District four in the University Hills neighborhood is at the southwest corner of I-25 and Evans Avenue. It's about one and three quarters acres just south of the Colorado station, light rail station. And the request is to rezoning the property in order to redevelop the site. As I mentioned, the property is currently zoned C and five with the same zoning surrounding it on the East and west with a planning and development zoning just to the south and C 20 zoning across Evans Avenue to the north. You also notice outlined on the map is a another rezoning that is the following public hearings. So these are two rezonings from the same applicants, same property owners, but two separate applications for separate rezonings. The property is also part of the Colorado Station General Development Plan, which was approved in 2008. It is in the secondary G.D.P. area development area, too, which calls for primarily office uses with ground floor, retail and heights generally up to six stories. It also calls for new open space if land assemblage allows, and the GDP also states that it does not specifically control height, use or density. And those things can be changed without any amendment whatsoever to the general development plan. Existing land use is office and commercial. And then you can see commercial and mixed use along Evans Avenue and then residential to the south. And here you can see the subject properties and some of the surrounding properties. As part of this rezoning, the city has also negotiated a development agreement with the developer that covers housing, open space and streetscape. Specifically, the developer has committed to providing 10% of the residential units as affordable at 80% of the area median income for 99 years. 25% of those units will be two bedroom or larger, and units will be built as part of the first phase of this development. For the open space, the developer has committed to a minimum of 30,000 square feet of private or publicly accessible private open space with at least 20,000 square feet of that in one compact and contiguous segment to serve as a pocket park. And that will be protected by an open space easement with the city. And then the developer has also committed to install detached sidewalks with tree lines, as opposed to the standard requirement in this area which would be attached to sidewalks. This went to the planning board on September 18th, received a unanimous recommendation of approval. One member of the public spoke. Went to the committee on October 8th. You'll have in your packets a letter of support from the University Hills North Community, along with the Good Neighbor Agreement that they have signed with the developer. In order to approve a rezoning, the city must find that these five criteria have been met. The first criterion is consistency with adopted plans. There are four plans that apply to this property. The first is Comprehensive Plan 2040. As described in the staff report, staff has found the proposed rezoning is consistent with these ten strategies from Count Plan 2040 relating mostly to equitable development, providing a range of housing types near transit. Increasing access to affordable housing and open space. The second plan is Blueprint Denver from 2019. The plan designates the context for this area as urban center, which is consistent with the urban center context of the proposed Sea Annex eight zone district. The future place designation for this property is a community corridor, which calls for a mix of office, office, commercial and residential uses and heights , generally up to eight storeys, which again is consistent with the proposed sea and zone district. Evans Avenue is a mixed use arterial, and both Cherry and Claremont are designated locals providing property access. The property is within the community corridors in the center's future growth area, which is intended to accommodate 25% of new housing and 20% of new jobs over the next 20 years. Also within Blueprint Denver, there are various strategies. Staff has found that the proposed rezoning is consistent with these three strategies relating to providing mixed use development, particularly near transit, affordable housing and providing additional open space. As a staff finds the proposed rezoning is consistent with Blueprint Denver. The third plan is the Colorado Station General Development Plan, which I mentioned earlier. As I said, the uses are primarily commercial, which is consistent with the proposed zoning. The GDP calls for heights generally up to six storeys, but again, the GDP does not actually control height, density or use, and it also calls for that open space which would be provided through that development agreement that finds the proposed rezoning generally consistent with the Colorado Station General Development Plan. And the last plan is housing and inclusive. Denver. The city's affordable housing plan, which calls for providing additional affordable housing throughout the city. And again, through that development agreement, additional affordable housing would be provided on the site. So staff finds the proposed rezoning consistent with the relevant adopted plans and the first criteria, and that the second criterion is uniformity of district regulations. Staff finds the proposed rezoning would result in the uniform application of the C Annex eight zone district. The third criterion is to further the public health, safety and general welfare of the city. Staff finds the proposed rezoning would do so by implementing the city's adaptive plans and providing that park space, promoting physical activity and better health. The fourth criterion is justifying circumstances. Staff finds the proposed rezoning justified by the changing and changing conditions in the area. There has been a fair amount of new development in this area, some higher intensity development on the south side of Evans, making this a denser area and new development around the station on the north side of Evans. Turning this really into a transit oriented development area. And this rezoning would be furthering that and consistent with those changes and justified by those changes in the area. The final criterion is consistency with neighborhood context, zone, district, purpose and intent. Staff finds the proposed rezoning would result in development that is consistent with the urban center neighborhood context, description and the zoning district purpose in intent for the CMC's zoned district, which is intended for areas or intersections served primarily by arterial streets where a building scale to date stories is desired. As I mentioned, Evans Avenue is an arterial street and blueprint. Denver calls for buildings generally up to eight stories, so staff finds all five criteria have been met and recommends approval. I'll be happy to answer any questions. Thank you very much. We have three individuals signed up to speak on this item this evening. First up is Chase Hill. Good evening to you all. I'm Chase Hill, the developer with Cypress Hill Advisors, and I'm here to answer your questions. Thank you. Next up, Ben-Hur to. Good evening. I'm Ben Hiroto with federal capital, also with the applicant. I'm here to answer our questions. Thank you. Next up, Jesse Paris. Good evening, members of council. My name is Jesse Paris. I represent for Denver Homicide Loud Black Star Action Movie for Self-defense, Positive Commitments for Social Change and the Unity Party of Denver, as well as the OPIO and Mile High North. And my questions are, what guarantee do we have that this is actually going to be affordable? And who is this exactly affordable for 80%? Am I is not affordable. We have a housing crisis in the city and we need units that are 0 to 30%. So 10% at 80%. That is not affordable. I don't know who lied and said that it is affordable. It is not affordable. So I want to know exactly what guarantee that we have that this is going to be affordable and what how many units are going to be built here? And when is the construction process on is going to begin and when is it going to be completed? Thank you. Thank you. That concludes our speakers on this item. Are there questions from members of council? Councilwoman Ortega. Thank you, Mr. President. Can you give us an idea? I guess I'm asking Chris Hill if you wouldn't mind coming forward. Can you give us an idea of how many units are proposed to be on the site so we know what 10% on the affordable is actually equates to. The initial initial massing. Studies show about 150 units. Okay. So we're talking about 15 units. That's correct. Okay. And 25% of them will be two bedrooms. That's correct. Will be proportional to what we do at the market rate, but a minimum of 25%. And will there be any commercial space on the site at all, or is it all intended to be residential? There likely will be. We're actually much farther along in the design of the first phase, which we'll be talking about next, but we anticipate having a retail component at the ground level. Okay. Will that phase, Evans? It will likely front Evans and turn the corner at Claremont. Okay. Great. Thank you. I have no further questions. Thank you, Councilman. Councilman Black. But I don't think you're Mike Tyson. Jenni, did you mean to speak? I guess. Yeah. So why don't you come up now and speak? Thank you. My name is Elizabeth Davis, and I live at 2575 South Cherry Street. I'm the co-president of the board of the University Hills Community, registered neighborhood or Neighborhood Organization. My co-president, Jennifer New Helfand, and I have provided a letter of support for your packets and are here to read a statement of support for the rezoning applications. 20181-00112 and 2019100024. In September 2018, the University Hills North Community R.A. Board met with representatives from Flywheel Capital and Cypress Real Estate Advisors regarding their planned development at the Cameron Motel site. For the first time in the following months as the R.A. reviewed the project's Phase one plans. Board members and the community at large cited concerns with traffic, parking, architectural fit and overall project impact to the neighborhood. These concerns were relayed to the development group in an effort to establish lines of communication for neighborhood input on the impacts of the proposed development. In a subsequent meeting, representatives from the Cameron Project informed the board of their intent to request zoning, zoning, zoning variances for Phase one. Pudi g m you three to see them x five and phase two of their project or from S.M. x five to see a max eight to gain neighborhood support for the variance. The developer was willing to enter into a good neighbor agreement to address neighborhood concerns with the aforementioned plan. Scope and overall impacts of the Development. I want to be clear that the only reason the board and neighborhood is in support is due to the contents that were agreed to in that good neighbor agreement. We expected developers to be accountable to it. The zoning variances are consistent with the Denver Transit Oriented Development Strategic Plan, calling for increased housing density through the building height and light rail station watersheds that are prime locations for activation. The Colorado station watershed has been identified as such a location, and the Cameron site is in close proximity. Safe, pedestrian, bicycle and E-Scooter passage across Evans Avenue to the to Colorado station will be paramount in achieving TOD density goals while promoting light rail use. The developers have committed to working with the neighborhood and the city to address these multimodal traffic concerns to the benefit of the safety and welfare of the existing neighborhood and its current and future residents. I'm out of time. I see. So sorry. Just to clarify, so it looks like you had signed up to to speak as speakers for this item, and we got you on the wrong one. So both of these are connected. They're both in our neighborhood. Okay. So just to clarify for the record from our secretary and legal, do they need to make this statement on the record for both items then or speaking at this one hour so that it's officially on the record in case this were to be reviewed? How do you want to handle that? Kirsten Crawford Legislative. Counsel I think it would be good to have her to speak on both matters. Speaking on both matters in this hearing or speak on both matters wants at each hearing. One for. Each hearing. Wants at each hearing. Okay. So then we are going to keep you under the hour. Rules for testimony to the 3 minutes. Councilwoman Black might call you back up to answer questions or to finish anything. But we're going to get you and finish with Jennifer on 3 minutes, if that's okay. Jennifer knew how often. You also have 3 minutes. Okay. Thank you. Um, I am Jennifer New Hoffman, and I am the other co-president of the new agency, R.A. And I will finish the statement that Liz started. The newly adopted Denver Comprehensive Plan 2040 designated the site is located within an urban corridor neighborhood context that calls for increased ground level activation. This project will achieve that goal through ground floor retail on the Phase two property on August 20th, 2019. The voting members of the R.A. were presented. The principal proposed assurances to be included in the Good Neighbor Agreement, including an RTD pass for each initially signed and designated green space, both of which address and improve public health, safety and welfare. An empowered neighborhood primary point of contact. A thoughtful construction and parking plan. And continued collaboration communication with the University Hills North community are other assurances provided by the developers and the Good Neighbor Agreement. These will ensure that the project will be a partnership that integrates a new development into our community in a way that maximizes its benefit to the developers and the community. The University Hills North Community Board voted in favor of supporting the zoning variance from CMCs five two CMCs eight, as well as the PD and GM use three to CMC's five contingent upon the execution of the Good Neighbor Agreement. Today, the Good Neighbor Agreement has been completed to the satisfaction of both the Cameron Project representatives and representatives of the agency. The University Hills North Community fully supports the proposed zoning variance and the statement was provided on behalf of the entire board. And see. No, thank you. Thank you very much. All right, Councilwoman Black, now we're going to get back to do you have any additional questions in addition to that? Yes. Go ahead. Okay. I have a question for the development team. Can one of you come up and talk about this sign? It's an iconic sign. And I know there was a lot of talk about preserving it somehow. So can you tell us what you're planning to do with the sign? It's really. Thank you. Thank you. And thank you for asking the question. We feel the signs are iconic as well, and we had intended to preserve those signs, in fact, as part of this project. There was a small portion of land immediately adjacent to Evans and the onramp to I-25 that was previously owned by C Dot. And as part of our agreement with Cedar, that was access real estate that Scott was going to dispose of as part of our agreement with C, that we have agreed to preserve those signs and incorporate those signs into the project. And so that agreement is in place. And if for whatever reason, that does not happen, we had agreed with that to offer those signs to the city of Denver or historic Denver or another nonprofit type of organization in order for them to be preserved. Thank you. Thank you. And for those of you who don't know what we're talking about when we say the sign, it's the Cameron Motel is from the fifties and it's right on Evans and I, 25. And it has a very cool old neon sign. That would be a nice neighborhood landmark. Thank you, Councilman. All right. I thought Councilman Cashman was up next, so I apologize. Councilman Kennedy, I'll get back to you. I don't know. We got a lot over there, Councilman Cashman. Thank you, Mr. President. So anyone from the development team. So 1008 and 1009, which will be coming up next, are paired together. Was total acreage of the two plots. Total acreage is right around five and a half acres, five and a quarter acres. Okay. And you said 150 units estimated on on this portion. How about on the on the other portion? On the other portion is about 360 units. Okay. So about 500 total units. Do you have any idea have you done any traffic studies as at this point looking at what your development would generate? We're still very early on in the site development plan process and building budget process. We have reached out to the relevant departments of the city and we are advancing those conversations. But to date we have not completed a traffic study, but we do anticipate it being a requirement of the STP. Yeah, I'm just trying to envision, I believe one of the main access streets would be cherry. Is that correct? And let me ask my client, Cherry Street's Cherry Street Dead ends at a at the highway. Right. The main access point is off of Claremont, North Side. Thank you. And one of the things that we've discussed with the city and staff up until this point is ingress and egress off of Claremont and what the potential options of those are. While those have not been finalized at this point, we have been in discussions with city staff about what those options could be. Yeah, I'm trying. Regardless of numbers of units or whatever, I'm trying to envision how you would turn left to go westbound on Evans out of that. I don't I don't think that would be possible. Okay. The idea we envision is that you would actually get a bird such as a light protected light and take a left there. You you'd go over. So you would take Warren over to Birch north on Birch, and then take a left or west on Evans. Great. Okay. Thank you very much. That's another question. All right. Thank you. Councilman Cashman, Councilman Hines. But thank you, Mr. President. I also have a question for the developers. You decide. Pick your favorite. We'll take. We'll talk to you. Okay. So there are 150 units. In this and this section in Bill 1008. Correct. Housing units under 50 on the North Parcel we're talking about now and 360 on the southern half. Okay. And 10% affordable housing as I. Right. So 15 on this, uh, this this parcel. That's right. And 36 of the other. And will the affordable housing will there be on site four. Is that is it in this industry exclusionary affordable housing within the projects we're building? Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilman. Councilwoman each. Thank you very much. I just kind of thought that maybe Melissa Teddy is the one to ask about this, but is there a parallel build, alternative plan or development agreement? So I just want to clarify. I heard that there is a good neighbor agreement and that the affordable housing is in there. But that's we're not it's not in there. Oh, okay. So let's I just want to clarify which city, where, what the status of any city applications or agreements are regarding this. Melissa Tardy Department of Housing Stability. We have an executed development agreement which solidifies the affordable housing commitment. And so that development agreement is not being submitted to council because it doesn't meet the thresholds for council approval. Correct. Okay. So there are no vested rights in that development agreement then than that? Correct. Okay. And then can you just remind us again, even though when we have these units created at 80% of AMI our law and regarding source of income nondiscrimination in voucher holders, can you just talk about how it is that units at this level might be occupied by families who are lower income. For a deeper affordability or at the 80%? Well, how they would how how a family with a voucher might might be a lower income than 80. Sure. So various organizations, but especially the Denver Housing Authority, administers our housing choice vouchers, which are what we call tenant based vouchers. So they travel with the tenant. So, for example, a family who has a 0 to 30% AMI may carry a voucher with them to this project and could live in an 80% or below in my unit . Additionally, there is a source of income, nondiscrimination or anti-discrimination ordinance which says that landlords cannot discriminate against tenants based on how they pay their rent. So if someone came with a voucher, that would need to be accepted. And can you just refresh us as a family at 30% of AMI, as a working family often, what is it that they're earning at that level. And have to look it up? I pulled up the 80%. Okay. It's would it be fair to say they're like minimum wage workers in that range? Yes. Right. So these might be service workers. Yeah, it could be. You know, to single are two parents, both working full time minimum wage. Okay, great. Thank you. And then can I just speak to the developer team for just a second? So you have executed the development agreement, so there's a binding city ability to enforce. This is in lieu of your linkage fee payments? I'm guessing so. And you're aware of the need to be nondiscriminatory in advertising these units and making them available? That's correct. Okay. And you will be operating these units, not just will you be developing and then maintaining ownership or you'll be selling? That is correct, that we don't know for how long or when, but the idea is to develop and operate it and also manage it. Okay. Well, then I would ask for your commitment to make sure that if you are passing on ownership of this, that you make sure that any buyers are on notice regarding Denver's laws and regarding I know that they're bound by the development agreement, but just making sure they're aware of the need to advertise nondiscrimination in their in their in their advertising. We certainly. Will. Okay. Thank you. And your management company, I guess in some case, you probably won't be managing it. All right. All by yourself. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman. All right. Seeing no other questions. The public hearing from counsel Bill 1008 is closed. Comments by members of Council Councilman Black. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you to our neighborhood leaders. Thank you so much for coming down here and really for doing such an incredible job for your neighborhood. They have spent hundreds of hours working on this and advocating for their neighborhood and talking to a lot of different people who have a lot of different opinions. So thank you very much for your leadership. And I also want to thank Chris Nevitt, who I didn't call up to ask. Questions of. But Chris Nevitt is our toddy director for the city and he was very much involved along with Scott Robinson on this project. It is in a very central location in Denver, directly across Evans from the Colorado Light Rail Station. And it is one of our goals in our city to direct density to our light rail station so that people will take the train and not drive their car. And so this is meeting one of those goals currently, that edge of the neighborhood, the edge of their neighborhood that's closest to Evan, has just a strange mishmash of random zoning that there's really no rhyme and reason to it. Paul Cashman and I, I think as far back as 2015, met with our community planning and development director and staff, begging them for some kind of plan for this neighborhood because we predicted what was going to happen. And that is exactly what has happened is now there's lot homes and one really big apartment building that everyone hates and a lot of other stuff. And so it's really unfortunate that they did not listen to us, but I'm excited to say that this section of Evan's will be part of our next neighborhood planning initiative starting next summer, and that public works is working very hard to get an Evans Corridor study funded, so it will coordinate with that neighborhood planning initiative. And then we are also working with Stantec to do sort of a mini neighborhood generated little neighborhood plan so that we can have some more weighty discussions with anybody else who who comes forward. So a couple of the big benefits to this program is the open space. Chris Nevitt and his team negotiated with them for that which was much needed. And believe it or not, in this part of town, we have Hollywood sidewalks and initially public works was just going to let them put in Hollywood sidewalks. But thanks to Chris, they are not. And so, yes, wow. Imagine that we're going to have real sidewalks. They can walk to a light rail station. So I'm very happy about that. And as I think everyone knows, earlier this year, the city purchased almost two acres for a neighborhood park, which was greatly needed. So good things are happening. We need to remain vigilant and we need to hold the developers accountable and make sure that the good neighbor agreement is enforced. I'm really excited. You're going to give people light rail passes. That is exactly the kind of thing we need to do. So again, thank you to everyone. I will be supporting this. The final thing I'm going to say is to public works. We need to make these streets around the light rail station more safe and more walkable. Bucktown, Colorado Boulevard and Evans, they're not safe to walk across. And so we need to keep on that. So thank you very much. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman Cashman. Yeah, thank you, Mr. President. So I've had two concerns about this development, one being traffic, just knowing the area. They're having a hard time envisioning the access and the egress. The other concern that I have is and this is not particularly this development, it's how it's our approach to affordable housing period. I don't think we can raise a flag over 10% affordable housing. It's not going to get us where we need to go. However. I believe the proposal meets the criteria that we're asked to assess. I have COBRA no precedence here supporting the development and I have nobody here raising their voice against it. So I'll be supporting this this evening while maintaining those concerns and hope they're well addressed along the way. Thank you, Councilman. Councilman Hines. Thank you, Mr. President. I want to thank all of you for all the work that you've done for this for this project. I also want to thank Councilwoman Black for her lifting up the replacement of Hollywood sidewalks for the sidewalks that people can actually use. And I want to thank you for your commitment. You know, it's important for us as a city to to get beyond a car centric society. 75% of Denver ites commute to and from their work by single occupant vehicle. And it's partly because 10% of Denver has no sidewalk at all. Another 30% of Denver has sidewalks narrower than four feet wide, like these Hollywood style sidewalks. So this is part of the part of that all hands on deck on you know, I mentioned climate change earlier. You know, helping us protect. Our. Our planet means that we need to get out of our cars. And and the way we do that is to make sure that we have the freedom to get from A to B and feel safe while doing it. So thank you for for being willing to to put in real sidewalks there and and to put in and to provide bus passes. Thank you, Honorable Nevitt for for all your work as well making sure that we that we continue to push this and so I will be supporting this this evening as well. So thank you. Thank you. Councilman Kelso. I'm sorry. Thank you, Mr. President. I have to just second. Councilman Cashman's comments. I think that, you know, we have Arnaud. Presidents here who are. Supporting this. And I think that that is fantastic. And without anyone here from the neighborhood who is speaking against it there, and it's clearly fitting into the criteria, there's really no reason for us not to support this. But I definitely don't think that 15 units is getting us anywhere near where we need to be with our affordability goals. And that is a shame because there's a real opportunity here, especially this close to transit, for us to really achieve some much needed affordable housing. So I just want to put that out there. And, you know, I wish that there were a way for us to achieve some. To make a real dent in our affordable housing needs in this. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Counsel. I'm sure seeing no other comments on this item. Madam Secretary, roll call. Black I. Flynn. I Gillmor. I Herndon. I Heintz. I Cashman. Kenny Ortega. Hi. Sandoval, I. Sawyer, I. Torres. Hi. Mr. President. Hi, Madam Secretary. Please close the voting in the results. 12 hours. 12 hours counts. Bill 1008 has passed. Councilman Kennedy, will you please vote counts? Bill 1009 on the floor?

Recommendation to receive and file an oral report as an update on the Everyone Home Long Beach Initiative. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_08102021_21-0770

Thank you. So just as a reminder, we have one item and then after this one item, it's a presentation, an important presentation. Then we move on to the budget hearing. So we're going to hear an update on the Everyone at Home Long Beach plan and then we'll move on to the budget. Item 17 is a report from Health and Human Services Development Services recommendation to receive and file an update on the Everyone Long Beach Initiative of the city by. Thank you. And before we before we have Mr. Modica start, I do know that everyone in front of them has the original everyone home Long Beach Task Force recommendations, I think should have a book in front of them. And also I know the presentation we wanted them in talking to Mr. Modica. For those who don't know our everyone home Long Beach plan is our our action plan and our work product that the Health Department put together with a really great group of folks from across the community chaired by our President, Jane Connolly of Cal State Long Beach, and included almost all of our organizations that were doing direct work around around homelessness and helping people experiencing homelessness and the housing work that's been in place for so many years. This plan will this update will give us the latest as to where this plan is from when it was released to the city council. And also talk about how we have met some of the metrics or maybe not met some of the metrics that we still have to work on as part of the plan. And so again, want to thank before Mr. Modica starts. Just the incredible group of folks that worked on this plan a few years ago. I think they are probably listed in this book and just grateful to that work and the work of the Long Beach Health Department. So, Mr. Modica. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think he summarized that very, very well. So I will just turn it directly to Kelly and Oscar, who will give the report's Kelly copy and Oscar worthy. Good evening, honorable mayor and Council Members. I thank you for this opportunity to share the mid-term progress on everyone's home line breach plan. Oscar worthy Director of Development Services has joined me for this presentation. You. Everyone from Long Beach Initiative was established to address the homelessness crisis in the city of Long Beach. We gathered a task force chaired by Cal State Long Beach President Jane Close Connelly. The task force comprised of nearly 50 community leaders, stakeholders and people with lived experience during the summer of 2018 to present information on homelessness, existing resources and gaps, the task force developed engaged the Homeless Services Advisory Committee, Continuum of Care Board and other community members to inform the recommendations. The Task Force established a set of goals and strategies which were adopted on December 11th, 2018. This document has been our guiding focus since that time. There are seven key goals within the report. Strengthening governance. And increasing funding. Increasing housing access. Reducing homelessness. Employing people. Supporting families. Connected to help. And developing population based service models. I'd like to start tonight's presentation with some context. In our last homeless count in January 2020, just before the pandemic, we had 2034 people experiencing homelessness in Long Beach. This was up slightly from the previous year. People self-reported that they became homeless due to insufficient income and loss of jobs, family problems, loss of housing and behavioral health concerns, including mental health and substance use. Nearly half reported that it was their first time homeless. 28% had experienced homelessness for more than two years and are considered chronically homeless. In the past year, we have seen substantial increases in funding and recognition of homelessness as a public health crisis. However, this is not fully led to more people in transitional housing, as COVID 19 protocols reduce by nearly half the number of beds available in congregate shelters. Given the distancing restrictions and some shelters stopped taking new participants to ensure a person with COVID wasn't entering the facility, we began to hear more about encampments and as CDC guidance was to reduce encampment cleanups, to reduce possible community transmission due to encampment disruption proven also led to reduced access to vital public facilities and services as people were needing them even more than before. Another factor in the past year was the focus on reducing people in congregate settings, including the jails and prisons to reduce transmission. People in jails and prisons were released, but there were little, if any, additional housing and resources to meet their needs, leaving many of them homeless as well . The COVID pandemic has in many ways set us back in our efforts a little to address homelessness in Long Beach. However, you will see that we've made great strides on many areas of the Everyone Home Long Beach plan and we have significant opportunities in our future. Our first goal was to strengthen governance and increase funding. It was to build governance, data capabilities, communications and financing to support a coordinated and robust homeless services system and housing system. The task force set a goal of 25 million and ongoing sustainable funding for operations, programs and services and another 220 million in capital funding. Rapidly expanding state and county funding has helped us move very close to this goal. To date, we're very near the goals for ongoing funding and one quarter of the way there for capital funding. We expect to reach about 50% of the capital funding goal by 2023. Is there significant capital funding in the state budget over the next two years? The chart on the left here shows the funding. In 2018, we had eight funding sources for a total of $39 million, including housing voucher subsidies and capital funding. We now have 11 funding sources totaling nearly $95 million. 64 million is for new services and assistance funding, and 23 million is available to us through grant terms over the next two years. The primary focus areas for the funding include interim housing, housing authority, vouchers and capital improvements, remaining funds, support, homeless prevention, outreach, coordinated entry system and case management, rapid rehousing and permanent supportive housing. Remaining resources also fund MSD Operations Program and Administrative Staffing Data Systems and overall administration. Our additional accomplishments in it, in addition to the funding, is that we have elevated the homeless services from a division to a bureau, hiring many new staff, including a focus on hiring around mental health and health care in our jurisdictional work and other special projects. We improve the continuum of care governance, adopting a new charter in 2020 to increase policy and decision making responsibility within the CRC Board. We also implemented a new number and implemented a number of collaborative work groups to focus on specific areas of need in the city. Finally, we enhance collaboration by transitioning to the Clarity Homeless Management Information system, which is right surrounding jurisdictions are using. This allows us to better coordinate services and outcomes with our regional partners. Our initiatives in progress include developing an affirmative marketing plan to ensure communications are focused and effective in achieving equity for communities who are disproportionately impacted by and experiencing homelessness. We are implementing a lived experience advisory board to ensure a lived experience is informing our policy program and resource decision making. We expanded access and referrals to the coordinated entry system to improve access so that regardless of which homeless services provider you are working with, you are being all or being prioritized for the resources within the system. And we're also developing contractor performance management dashboards, advocating for additional funding and piloting the Unite US referral platform to increase service access. The second goal is to expand housing opportunities and incentivize major landlords to provide housing to low income and homeless individuals and families. Everyone home goals for increasing housing. Access for 200 shelter beds by 2020, 200 new permanent supportive housing units by 2023 and 2000 very low and low income units either entitled or online in the pipeline by 2023. We have made strong progress on this goal in the past two and a half years, surpassed our goal by double in 2024. The shelter crisis beds are bringing 402 shelter crisis beds online in 2020. 402 beds in one year. During the pandemic, we have quadrupled the permanent supportive housing goal with 844 units of permanent supportive housing underway or completed. And we have an additional 425 units of low and very low income housing being developed or in the pipeline. In 2020, the city opened. The Atlantic Bridge community in North Long Beach, purchased the best western motel on Long Beach Boulevard. The project Homekey funding and supported the Los Angeles County Purchase and opening a project Homekey Sites funded Motel six and Holiday Inn, which brought an additional 175 beds to our city. We continue to operate Project Roomkey through August of 2021, which brings an additional 43 beds. In addition, we've issued 1582 vouchers for a total of 9375 bed nights. Through our new nightly capacity at this time is 484 individuals and households each night. Efforts to increase our housing access has resulted in the development or processing of approximately or not approximately 1269 total supportive housing units, as well as low and very low income housing units. This figure includes 15 projects that have been completed throughout the city. With a yield. Of approximately 589 total housing units. Next slide, please. Also included in this figure are the preservation and rehabilitation efforts that have maintained 288 units in the city. Three residential projects with 53 units currently under construction and five development projects with 483 units that are approved or in the permitting process. We estimate that an additional 400. Units will be processed in the near future under current funding sources. Next slide, please. Additional accomplishments aimed at increasing housing access include inclusionary housing and the no net loss ordinance aimed at providing new affordable housing through new market rate development. The motel conversion ordinance creates avenues to increase supportive and rapid entry, as well as transitional housing. The Interim Housing Zoning Code Update expanded the locations of interim housing, as well as supportive of various supportive housing types throughout the city. The A.C. ordinance provides a clear path to encourage the rehabilitation and preservation of unpermitted units and the Miller Ordinance updated policies for the replacement of affordable housing within the coastal zone. The new plan and rezoning, which is a collaborative effort between the city and the North Long Beach community, establish zoning to provide, in part, additional housing support . Excellent. Continue to develop new housing opportunities through the Long Beach Recovery Act. In the next year, we anticipate opening a transition age shelter for youth aged 17 to 24 at our Navigation Center location on Hayes Avenue, as well as bringing 50 modular shelter units online. The Project Homekey sites are slated to be turned into permanent supportive housing in 2022, utilizing state funding, bringing an additional 217 permanent supportive housing units online. Thank you. Notable policy efforts. Policy efforts included the housing element, which will identify development opportunities to accommodate over 26,000 additional dwelling units throughout the city of various income levels. The housing element was released earlier this year. Community engagement continues and the draft element will be brought to the council in the fourth quarter of this year. The Anaheim Corridor Zoning Implementation Plan will provide visioning and planning efforts for new zones that will implement the land use element and encourage housing production. Lastly, the Enhanced Density Bonus Program is designed to incentivize and facilitate the development of mixed income. Multifamily housing. By. Establishing development concessions in exchange for onsite affordable units. Excellent. The third goal is to reduce homelessness. We reduce homelessness for prevention, early intervention and reducing our chronic homeless population. The Homeless Services division as partners continue to make progress on this goal. The goal focuses on reducing people falling into homelessness to fewer than 1500 annually, ensuring that if people fall into homelessness, they can be rehoused within six months, and that we have fewer than 350 chronically homeless people in Long Beach. The pandemic has slowed our progress in preventing homelessness. We currently are serving 1200 new homeless households engaged with us as well as we know that during the homeless count there were nearly a thousand people who were identified. So we know that there are more than 1500 households currently that are falling into homelessness. You prevention resources are available and we'll continue to work closely with partners to reduce the number of falling into homelessness. We've made strong progress in moving people from temporary to permanent housing. At this time, 66% of households access housing in less than six months, and 74% of households with a child are accessing housing within six months. Producing and reducing our chronically homeless population remains a challenge. The 2020 count found that we had 665 people who are chronically homeless. We continue to prioritize those who've been homeless for more than two years and seek to achieve this goal by 2023. These charts sort of provide a picture to what we were just discussing. What you'll see here is that in the chart on the left is that the chronic, chronically homeless population remains fairly stable, and that what we're seeing is that the new homeless is where we're seeing our increases. We continue to prioritize this population and work to build relationship and connection to services that on the right shows the percent of households exiting to permanent housing over a over a year time frame and longer. And once again, 66% of adults and 74% of families with children exit into permanent housing within six months. People who are experiencing unsheltered homelessness have significant, longer experiences of homelessness. This chart here basically shows it shows you that we've been fairly consistent in our ability to house people each year when we're talking about households. But because we've had the increase in resources in 2020, we have seen an increase, almost doubling of the number of households that we've been able to house in one year. We continue to expand outreach and sheltering opportunities. We've moved forward with outreach on the weekends and high impact neighborhoods and implemented the Safe Parking Program with the ability to serve 13 each night. We are working now to identify an additional site and expand operations. The L.B. Cares Rental Assistance Program provided up to $3,000 per household impacted by the pandemic. This program served 1440 households in the city. The city also entered into an MOU with L.A. County to provide legal assistance for those experiencing tenant landlord disputes. Policies to reduce homelessness included tenant assistance, including just cost termination, as well as the State Tenant Protection Act, which established provisions to protect tenants from evictions caused by the pandemic. The Senior and Disabled Security Deposit Assistance Program provided provides security deposit assistance of up to $3,000 to lower income seniors and or disabled households. Excellent. The Housing Authority received 582 emergency housing vouchers this year for people experiencing homelessness. This is a great opportunity to provide permanent housing opportunities in existing housing across the city. Vouchers will be prioritized for those with the greatest need. We have identified funding to provide case management to households receiving these vouchers to support their housing success. The City Council elected to combine federal and state funds for a total of $64.4 million to provide rental assistance for those tenants impacted by the pandemic. So far, there are over 13,000 registered applicants and we continue to process their requests. The city will be amending the MRU with the County of Los Angeles to expand the right to counsel program services to assist tenants facing evictions due to direct and indirect impacts from the pandemic and related economic impact. Excellent. The fourth goal is focused on increasing employment opportunities for people at risk of or experiencing homelessness. Our goal was to create 600 new job opportunities for adults and 240 job opportunities for transition age youth by 2021. At this time, the city has created 60 slots of supported employment and we are in the planning for a transition age youth program. During the pandemic, many jobs across the city were lost and creating new opportunities was very difficult. Jobs programs with our partners continued, but at lower capacities during the pandemic, we continued to seek employment resources. The primary funding in the county is administered through the Los Angeles County Department of Workforce Development, Aging and Community Services, otherwise known as the Relax Relax hubs for initiatives focused on employment, supports for people experiencing homelessness across the county and is seeing large increases in funding. We are working to tap into those programs and resources to grow employment supports in the City of London. Homeless pilot. The other things that we have been doing this year is the Homeless Corp pilot, which is current misdemeanors and working and works towards dismissal. If persons are working with service provider which expunging their past convictions and works to address current warrants, that may be barriers to housing or employment. Pacific Gateway has co-located career counseling staff across the city at places like the Center for Health Equity and Reform, as well as link housing sites such as the Spark and the Palace. Pacific Gateway has engaged in a cross-agency case conferencing. The Long Beach Youth Services Network addressing the housing, health, employment and other needs of transition age youth. In progress. As part of the Recovery Act, the Health Department is exploring partnerships with economic development and public works to create a social enterprise healthy foods market at the Rented Bridge Farm Shelter in North Bombay, which would create a workforce development opportunity for transition age youth experiencing homelessness, as well as providing access to healthy food for the surrounding neighborhood. Pacific Gateway has reached out to the City of Long Beach Council of Business Associations, encouraging businesses to create employment opportunities for jobseekers experiencing homelessness. We also continue to focus on our employment program through our state hub funding and our focus. And there are tax incentives, state tax incentives for hiring persons who are experiencing homelessness. It goes supporting families and children so that we know that we have strong families because we know they are essential to positive futures. We set out to establish 400 new childcare slots for very low income and homeless parents by 2021. 200 were created prior to the pandemic, but we don't have a good sense of where things are now, given the pandemic's impact on early childhood providers. In 2018, the Health Department launched the Early Childhood Education Plan that outlined many goals and strategies to ensure our young children and families have opportunities for success. It continued to implement this plan that included creating opportunities for people experiencing homelessness. Also, nearly 1 million in CARES Act funding supported families and providers in the past year, and we will continue this work through the Recovery Act. In addition, we are creating housing opportunities as part of the previously discussed emergency vouchers. We are currently holding 100 vouchers for families with young children, as well as 64 people being served by a victim service provider. Future opportunities include 1 billion in funding and then state budget to address family homelessness and 1.5 million set aside for early childhood supports in the Recovery Act. The six goals focused on behavioral health and physical health services. This girl continues to be our most difficult to achieve, given county focus and funding limitations. At this time, there are only three medical detox sites in L.A. County, and we have not identified substance use funds for sobering center. We have continued to engage in conversations with the county around detox programs. However, Medi-Cal funding does not fund these at the same level as other services, and few providers are interested in opening these sites. The county has opened 14 new recuperative care beds in the city, but they serve not just the city of Long Beach, but all of L.A. County. Mechanisms for tracking hospital E.R. discharge data are not currently available. Prior to the pandemic, there was a discharge planning collaborative that kept track of this, but they have not been meeting since the pandemic due to resourcing, and we anticipate that that will start back up in upcoming months. However, in the past year we have implemented a number of programs to support the health and mental health of people experiencing homelessness. This includes partnering with UCLA to implement a mobile opiate and HIV testing and treatment pilot, conducting vaccination clinics at the mercy shelters and in encampments, visiting registered nurses at various shelter sites, and placing a mental health clinician at the mercy to engage with people at the mercy. Moving into this year. We are also we are implementing a number of new programs, including our new REACH program with the mental health and public health nurses in the field and additional alternative mental health crisis planning. We continue to partner and advocate with the Los Angeles Department of Mental Health and Safety and Substance Use Center to advise mental states right to increase mental health and substance use opportunities in Long Beach. Yet this was not a key focus area of the county in the past year. Finally, the Recovery Act funds are providing an opportunity for mobile, mental or mobile multi-service clinics to create greater access to services in the community. And our final goal is focused on developing population specific housing opportunities and supports. There are many initiatives taking place to generate housing and supportive services for specific populations in Long Beach. To date, we funded rapid rehousing and homeless prevention services for youth utilizing hip funds. He funds one strategic plan for youth in emerging adults and the Office of Youth Development. These efforts focus on upstream prevention of homelessness in our youth. The Department is currently hiring a youth development manager as well as a reentry coordinator, funding a healthy aging coordinator, and establishing an older adult housing work group through the Healthy Aging Center. Collaborating with Pacific Gateway and other providers to connect transition ages, age youth to housing and supportive services. Focusing on equity and homeless services and partnering with the L.A. County offers a diversion and reentry co-location at the Multi-Service Center. There are ongoing challenges and needs that that have come from the pandemic. The economic impacts of COVID 19 pandemic rapidly exacerbated existing affordable housing and homeless needs and service gaps. We've seen a real increase in the cost of real estate, which impacts housing affordability and production, as well as the city's ability to purchase and construct facilities without sacrificing direct services. We had city staff focus, the city staff focus and prioritization has shifted due to the pandemic response. Hiring challenges have limited our capacity of the Homeless Services Bureau to quickly respond to emerging needs. The administration and location of mental health and substance use. Reentry services largely fall under L.A. County's jurisdiction, and they're planning is not currently meet the needs for Long Beach. You've also had new a lot of new and more flexible state funding, but they're almost all one time funds limiting the ability to fund ongoing supports and operations to support homeless services. The new Long Beach Recovery Act funds, which are approximately $11 million, will support the creation of multiple new programs, including two mobile mental to mobile and AC clinics that will be deployed throughout the community to improve services. The modular shelter program, the opening of a navigation center which will have storage as well as 12 shelter beds for youth outreach workers stationed at libraries throughout Long Beach. Supported employment programs for youth. Expansion of the Safe Parking Program. And implementation of the REACH program. The Rich program launched at the beginning of August. It is a mobile response team focused on urgent community requests and low level, non nonviolent calls for service related to people experiencing homelessness. There are two teams. Each one has a public health nurse, a mental health condition and two outreach workers. We are also hiring one person to focus specifically on phones and field coordination. This really is an alternative response model focused on getting people to services such as interim and interim and permanent housing, mental and physical health services. Case management. Crisis intervention and trauma informed care. The REACH team is currently available 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. during the weekdays and will be expanding that as additional resources are secured. At this time it is early. Watch it or piloting the proactive outreach in impacted areas and urgent requests and in early September will be we'll have live response to the MFC hotline, the version of low level and nonviolent nine on one calls for service with police and fire department handle. There's a large set of opportunities when it comes to funding. The enacted 2021 state budget provides about $10 billion towards housing and homelessness, reflecting the level of focus and support the state is providing to this important issue. The allocations listed here represent a variety of funding sources administered by different agencies, some of which are direct funding, while others are competitive grants or collaborations with the county. All of these represent opportunities to address the various root causes of homelessness. I don't plan to go through all of these, but you have them available to you to understand the large number and focus areas of funding available. We do know that you cannot run you cannot address homelessness in our city with just city employees. This list represents a portion of our important partners in this work. It takes all of us working together toward the same goals. Your city and community based teams. Thank you for your support in our efforts. I also want to give a big shout out to our homeless services team who kept the NSC open and have worked every day during the pandemic to ensure people experiencing homelessness feel supported, are housed and can continue their progress toward housing. It has been a big year for our Homeless Services Now bureau. So with that and our presentation or open for questions. Thank you, Mayor. Members of the City Council. Mr. Vice Mayor. That was a comprehensive presentation. I know this is such a big topic for the council. We wanted to really show you kind of all the pieces. We're prepared to answer a lot of questions. I do want to underscore, while there's a lot of successes and you can see there's funding opportunities, the funding need is still incredibly great. Affordable housing is incredibly expensive to build along, which has been a leader in that. But we need more and more resources every time we open up one of our shelters to those take operation dollars to be able to run, not only purchase them and run them. So the team is very aggressive. They're looking for a lot of funding opportunities that are out there. But I do want to point out there is still a ways to go. We know that there's a crisis across the country. Long Beach is a model in reacting and responding and being very proactive, as well as compassionate about dealing with people who are experiencing homelessness. But we know there is still a lot of work left to do. And with that, we're available for questions. Thank you, Tom. So we'll take the conversation back behind the rail. I'll go ahead and start. First of all, thanks for acknowledging there's still a long way to go. But what you have here, I think you demonstrate incredible progress. Congratulations to you. Our continuum of care, all of our partners on the incredible work that you presented today and your hard work over the past few years since adopting the Everyone Home Plan. When we adopted this, we emphasized data and goals, and what you were able to present today was responses with data and metrics and goals, and that's a measurability and that's important to highlight. We love to see that in plans because we can show to the public the benefit of having our own health department and our own continuum of care. We can we can control local outcomes on these issues. That's incredibly important. I think I'll highlight a few things and then I have a question or two. I'm very happy to see a lot of the things here, particularly the expansion of temporary shelter beds. We had no idea we would be able to expand so much over the course of the past year. And I think the pandemic actually changed a lot of attitudes around that. A lot of my backyard sentiments and you saw people even with the temporary shelters during the pandemic that popped up temporarily all across town prior to Project Homekey. You saw a complete change in that narrative. That's important to note. I'm very happy with the Atlantic Bridge community in North Long Beach. I'm very happy was completed. The residents are happy with it. It's a great community. We can't get to the larger master plan fast enough, so we want to get to that so we can actually start talking about what the what the permanent site looks like. I'm happy to see the direct connection to racial equity. I think it's important. You know, we've learned a lot and it's important that we make a connection. We know that homelessness disproportionately, it impacts everyone, but this personally impacts black homeless. We know that black families are impacted to a significant degree. And if you go in with that awareness, then you know how to approach the issue with the right level of attention and cultural sensitivity to be able to address the issues. That's important. I love that you had a policy like a lot of the homelessness issues and the poverty issues we have in our city are directly linked to policy, land policy, and the solution will have to be rooted in policy. And so you highlighted things like inclusion, inclusionary housing, dwelling, amnesty or local land use plans like the Uptown Plan, motel conversions and our housing element. The fact that in our land use element we create the space for 26,000 units that's actually above what our arena requirement is, is important. And that's important for people to understand because within that arena number, it's previous need, current need and future need over the next decade for housing. All of that is built into that number. We've already put forward a number and created the space in the city to surpass it. All other communities are really fighting and struggling to figure out how to deal with it. We were ahead of the ball, ahead of the curve. That's really important to note. I love the highlight under go for around jobs and employment. I love the partnership at the the new Ron Arias Health Equity Center soon to open. We love to see that the social enterprise market with the Atlantic Bridge community that will employ individuals experiencing homelessness. I think that's important. And and I also know that there are still there's still much more to do. There are some some threats. And one significant threat is growth of the social. Economic conditions globally are still creating conditions where people are still vulnerable. The vulnerability is still there are people still slipping into homelessness. And so that moves our targets. It's hard to say this is our goal when the goal continues to grow. We're seeing this resident see this manifest in the scenes of life. You see them in the you know, you see encampments that crop up on freeway, on an off ramps and in the areas that are not even the responsibility, the city, but other agencies. But that's what our community see. And those people definitely, certainly need help. So I think we're headed in the right direction with the partnerships that were born with Caltrans and others. I think that's important. I think it's important to know it's going to be expensive to buy, to build affordable housing. We had, you know, redevelopment years ago, $25 million a year. We're going to have affordable housing production. We're nowhere close to that in terms of the subsidy. Have to think outside the box. We have to continue to advocate for a dedicated source of revenue. I think one are opportunities as be. 649. A lot a lot comes out of Sacramento that may or may not be helpful as it relates to local giving local cities the tools to make a difference. And I think this is one that will on city council and have a discussion next week about supporting SB 649. And, you know, a few other things I think, you know, we need to think about creating our own mental health department within the city. No other jurisdictions have done that and have contracted in from the county. And I would love to explore what looks like the contract in mental health services. I think we need our own housing department to think about something to talk about. And I think the rights program, I think it's a great the fact that is great that we're rolling it out. I think there's some questions and, you know, I'll stop there, but I'll go ahead and ask a question on the REACH model. Walk me through a little bit of how how it works. I know it's a separate phone line to 911, but walked me through what happens if someone calls our regular emergency line 911? How would that be processed with the Reese model? If you could walk me through that, I think that would be helpful. They said they could call two different lines. So, one, they could call the NSC directly and request support, and then we would respond or they could call 911. And there are certain certain criteria for which 911 would transfer that line to the to the NSC to respond. Or they would send out, depending the police and fire department, depending on what the call was about. And then once their situation may be stabilized, to the point that the REACH team would then arrive and there would be a handoff opportunity at that point to continue to work with someone to engage them in additional services. Okay, great. So it sounds like there's more than one way that people can call and access this reach service or alternative crisis response. Okay. Those are my comments. I'm going to go now to Councilwoman Mongo. Thank you. I'm pushing the wrong button. Thank you. When you were talking about goal four of employing people, you discussed DAX or we DAX, the workforce development agent and Community Services Department and the program that they have. We have our own workforce department and typically when federal funds are allocated, we have our own allocation. Have we advocated for a similar apportionment for direct allocation to our own workforce development department of the Homeless funding for employing people out of homelessness? I know that. There are specific funds that we taxes receiving that is not federal funding. Correct. So it's coming from the county funding and. Correct. And I'm asking if we're advocating to use the same federal formula, if L.A. County on the way that Exide gets 40 million and we get 4 million, then if the county is receiving homeless funds and the amount of 4 million, then we would get equivalent. I understand now. Thank you. And I would have to, you know, engage with have the workforce discuss that upward. So I'm really interested in having that discussion. Otto Solorzano, the director, they're great individual, used to be my boss, and he was often really open to partnerships, especially regional ones that decentralized funding and gave other agencies the opportunity as long as we reported back on the systems that they're using to provide transparency through their dashboard. And I just see that as a huge opportunity for us to localize that workforce side that I just think is critical in getting individuals employed. I also want to thank our Economic Development Commission. I sat in on their meeting on Monday and their discussions around different issues that help people stay off the brink of homelessness and fall into homelessness and what economic factors that they can contribute to. And I really think it's very thoughtful and I appreciate that. I see an intersection between the Everyone Home and the Workforce blueprint to point out that I see as being a really huge step. I also appreciate this is a very comprehensive report and I know we're doing so much. And when we talked about the chronically homeless. I don't know if I can find the page quickly enough. It doesn't seem like we're making as much of an impact. And I think you'd stated how long a person is homeless to become chronically homeless. Could you remind me what that was? Over two years. Over two years. So. Is it that how many chronically homeless individuals are we getting into housing annually? I'm going to ask Paul Duncan, who's in the audience, if he has that number. We don't have a specific number. Like a dozen, two dozen. I mean, we have 600 people who are chronically homeless and that number is fluctuating a little bit. But I'm not clear what the inflow is and what the outflow is. And do we have a dashboard that demonstrates that? Can we can bring that information forward. But I'm going to ask Paul to join us now. Good evening, council members. The large majority of the permanent supportive housing units that you see within that presentation are all prioritized to people that are experiencing chronically homeless or experiencing chronic homelessness, as well as a number of resources that we get through HUD and through our Continuum of Care program. So we receive $10 million annually, about 6 million of that goes towards permanent supportive housing. So anytime there's a turnover in one of those units, they're also prioritized towards people that are experiencing chronic homelessness. So the majority of the people that we're housing that are single adults tend to be chronically homeless. Thank you. I appreciate that. I think that. There's a lot of discussion in our community about. How much do we spend on homelessness? It's not enough. I don't think people know how much it is. If you look at a $90 million number or a $40 million number, and then you take the homeless count of. 1820, 400, I mean, different numbers of year by year. And you spread that out and then you add to it the additional resources that are provided by city departments that are really just embedded in the work that we do every day. I think it really speaks to the value of certain programs. And this was another discussion that was had at the Economic Development Commission, which is the universal basic income. And if the universal basic income could keep someone from falling into homelessness and how much it really saves the taxpayer in the long run. Thank you. Thank you. Next, we have Councilwoman Pryce. Thank you very much. So thanks for that presentation. I really appreciate it. Has a lot of detail. I think it's safe to say that some of the increase that we've seen, increase of transient activity and homelessness that we've seen over the last year has a lot to do with the early release of certain populations without treatment rehabilitation once they're released from custody. Is that fair to say? We are saying that on the street. Yes. You know, are there any sort of what organizations do we have available in the city of Long Beach that can meet people literally as they're leaving jail to provide them access to services or offer some sort of, you know, treatment program or reentry services. We currently have the jail commission, so that is in jail now and who assesses and connects people to services as they're coming out. And we have a treatment center which also focuses with that population, but there's insufficient supports, certainly within the city of Palm Beach and frankly, all across L.A. County in the ability to address the number of people who need mental health and substance use support. That's unfortunate. What about in the area of nonprofits? I know in Orange County, we have an amazing organization called Project Kinship. They work really closely with our health care agency. They're literally at the jail. As people are released, they'll interface with everyone and at least give them the opportunity to connect. Is there any nonprofits like that that are active in that space? Not necessarily in Long Beach, but even in the county jail. We have a number of nonprofits that are focused to measure. H also pays for some jail and it's more focused on the county jails where necessarily the city jails. But there are a number of nonprofits that are doing enrich to the jails. And then we have a number of nonprofits that are focused on our reentry population within Long Beach. The two organizations that are most active within that space are there's three are The Advocate, a Tarzana treatment center and a center. So there are three nonprofits that we do work with and also partner with the city prosecutor's office and supporting and contracting to to some of those agencies. Okay. Thank you for that information. That might be something that maybe we can do a study session on in the future, because I think the work that those organizations do is incredible and would be worth highlighting and replicating many times over. And, you know, while we're talking about incredible work, Paul, I just want to take a moment and thank you. You've just been a really noticeable force over at the multicultural center. And I will say that my team and I very much enjoy working with you and appreciate your responsiveness and understanding. You know, kind of where we're coming from. It's always from a place of patience, not judgment and help. And I really appreciate that. So thank you. In regards to the jail conditions, so we do still have a jail commission in the jail in Long Beach. Is that correct? Programs still exist. But I think during the during the pandemic, it's been not as much of a presence, but an opportunity, I think more an online presence. Okay. All right. In terms of the employment opportunities you talked about, I know that a number of years ago that was one of the items I brought to council to start our homeless work pilot program. I'm curious, how is that program going and is that something that we can consider turning into a more of a permanent program moving forward? Yeah. When we look at some of the work force development programs that exist, there's a large focus on metrics, especially with the funding that comes from the federal level and really making sure that people are getting to sustainable, sustainable employment. And what we often see is a real hesitance to work with people that have been experiencing homelessness and maybe have been out of the workforce for a while because the outcomes are often not quite as high. So really looking at things around supportive employment, where we're offering some financial assistance to take a chance on somebody and provide them an employment opportunity. And I think that's the one area that we've seen the largest impact looking at employment focused services for people experiencing homelessness. So we could definitely look at expanding more opportunities there. That's great. I would very much support that and then I know I'm out of time here. But just the final question, the REACH program, which is a replacement for the HARP program. I know the HEART program had to have some approvals from L.A. County. DHS does the REACH program, or am I mistaken on that? I just don't know what kind of approvals we need from the county. The REACH program does not need any approvals. Got it. Thank you. Thank you. Council member Supernormal. Thank you. I will also follow up on the REACH program. We we featured that in our July 30th newsletter and we included a link to your I think it's July 22nd press release on that. And for for folks reading our newsletter, it's a little bit of a complicated formula. And so I guess I wanted to drill down a little bit on that. So fire will still respond to calls for persons experiencing homelessness. We know after 4:30 p.m. they will do that. But let's say during the day, will will fire still respond to those calls. And then is there an if is there an interaction in the field with the REACH teams or how do you see that actually working out there? So when the calls come in, if it is an emergency fire, we're always respond first. I mean that. So if if if it's a health emergency and is deemed a health emergency at the at the nine moment call center. Other than that, the the REACH team will be available wandering pro-active outreach in communities and encampments and others in addressing physical and mental health needs while they're there, as well as being responsive. So if someone calls the AMC and requests support or calls 911, it's not deemed an emergency. Then the Multi-Service Center, the REACH team would also go out. So it is a partnership. There are will be handoffs in different ways. So it might be that police or fire response first says, you know, this is not it's not an emergency, it's not critical. They'll hand them off to the REACH team to do further case management and other supports to try and eliminate the need to call nine on one in the future. Or it may be that we go out and we determine that the REACH team needs additional supports and may call on fire or police to support in those situations . So it's an ongoing partnership for sure through that process and the REACH team is available every day, at least during the weekdays until and we have additional resources will be on the weekends to be able to support the mental health and substance or side mental health and physical health needs of people. And the the REACH team itself with a county clinician is that from the unit model, same type of personnel working? It's not a county clinician, it's someone that we have hired with. So this person works directly for us and it's not through the county departments. So we've hired specifically to two nurses and two public health nurses and two mental health clinicians that are hired directly through the city. Okay. So you would have the same possible issue in the field if the Met unit is responding and and there could be a handoff from the Met Unit two to reach. Sure there could be. Yes. Okay. And just I see the fire chief there. Do we have any moneys, any funding coming in to address all of the fires that are happening in the areas of these encampments? Thank you, Councilman, at this moment. No, there is no additional funding specifically for the fires that we are that we are combating in the vegetation and all the other areas. We are realizing a great increase in fees as far as our firefighting. Foam. And some of the other issues that we have to contend with. Okay. Thank you. That's all I have. Thank you, Councilman Allen. Thank you so much for that comprehensive presentation and just all that you and your team does and the community. I know you've been out there in my district and I just feel like thank you isn't enough. But we sure appreciate it. We know that the programs that you are doing touches every aspect of lives, and I know for sure that we are a better city because of all your work. So thank you. I also wanted to say that I know the housing and employment opportunities are critically important to the community and we need to make sure that we are redoubling our efforts on supporting employment and those experiencing homelessness. And we need to get roofs over their heads. So they can pursue employment. I've said this before and I'll keep saying this, but, you know, childcare is absolutely imperative and important. This pandemic has a lot of people back and we need to help kids and we need to get their parents back to work. You know, I have a lot of people, especially those businesses that can't find employees, but it's really hard when when folks don't have good childcare. I know that we've had several questions regarding regarding the the REACH team. And so I'm just trying to just one further question, like what is the difference between the REACH team and the Heart team? And I can have as the fire chief to speak a little bit more about some of the specifics of the Hurt Team. The Hurt Team, they were available to respond. So if a call came in through 911, they may be dispatched to be able to respond to issues or medical related issues among the homeless population. And I think that their paramedics. Yeah. Yeah, there. Yeah. So the if I can jump in here for just a sec. So the heart team, specifically the mission of the Heart team was to enable the rest of our resources to be freed up. So the heart team would monitor dispatch and then go out on these calls, on typical calls that they thought might be dealing with the homeless or something that they could handle on their own, and they could upgrade or downgrade as they saw fit. And that would take calls off from our other apparatus, the engines and the rescues that would free them up for additional calls, heart attacks, difficulty breathing, stuff like that. So that was the the intent of the heart team primarily. And then the reached him includes a mental health response as well. So it's it's not specific to the same level from dispatch as fire and the integration of the fire response. But the REACH team includes a public health nurse who has a lot of case management and other sorts of opportunities and engagement to be able to connect people to services. And then our mental health clinician that will be onsite as well to be able to sort of maybe de-escalate certain situations, really try to understand where the what the different issues are, and to be able to connect people also to mental health and supports. Okay. Thank you. I might add, Councilwoman Ellen, some of some of the additional things that the Hart team is doing currently. So Councilman Supernanny brought up the all of the vegetation fires that we have. So we are currently using them to heat map the city, find where various encampments are ingress and egress for our fighting firefighting forces. They also, once we get rain, if we do get rain, they patrol the riverbanks, start to clear people out so that they're not in harm's way. So they're utility players for us, for the fire department. All right. Thank you very much. Thank you, Councilman. Sun ink you. Thank you for this great and very, very informative presentation. I think our city is doing a lot of good work and to provide a large amount of support to our homeless and homeless crisis that we're in and that we're living in today. One of my concerns often is that we as a city, I think, fall short of ensuring that our residents receive all of the information and direct connections to all of the resources and projects that we have. Can you can I have staff explain maybe a little bit more on the outreach efforts with this initiative and how to ensure what you're doing to ensure that this information is dispersed both in Spanish, English and any other language that may be needed out there. So we do work to make sure that our information is translated within on the website so that you're able to access it in multiple languages. We do provide translation services on site for anybody that is in need of translation. We have a number of staff that speak Spanish that that speaks command. But if somebody was in need of translation for another language, we do have access to supports for that as well as people that may need sign language. So that is something that we continue to make sure is available and that we're utilizing when when needed. As far as communicating out and being able to reach people, I think really in the slide we talked about Unite US, that's an online platform that's really focused on it's basically like a yelp for for support of services. So we're partnering with them and making sure that people know how to connect in with the agencies that are providing services and can even coordinate referrals to the best service provider to meet that need through an online platform. So that will be launching shortly. And then we have a number of efforts to increase our outreach, the incorporation of the mobile MFC clinic. So making sure that we're reaching throughout the community, that we're in the community and finding people where they're at and engaging them through a number of different ways. Thank you. Thank you for that. Also, one more question. I know that we've been referring a lot to the REACH team, which is, you know, great. And one of the questions that I had and you kind of touched upon it a little bit earlier, but who takes on those calls? Maybe you can clarify that a little bit for me. I know that in the past, from what I remember, please correct me if I'm wrong, but I do remember that with there were there was a dispatcher that was hired and to take those those calls from the community instead of calling the 911 number to be able to free up that number for other emergency. So maybe you can touch a little bit upon that, please. So we've had an outreach hotline for quite some time. It has not been staff just to do capacity. So this will be the first time where we have a staff that is answering that live and being able to coordinate with the caller who's asking for a response. So right now, if somebody were to call that hotline, there's a message system. We check that multiple times a day that the caller asks us for a call back to let them know the outcome, which is basically that we went out and we were able to engage. We will return the call. We do work to process those. Typically, we get every call within 24 hours and being able to go out. Sometimes it does take 48 hours just depending on the requests that are coming in. So this will be the first time that that's being answered. We also have an email where a number of people also submit requests through email. So we try to get as many requests as we can through the communities as we want to get out and engage as many people as we can. But remember, I think the the the model that you're referring to is we did pilot where we had a person from the multi-service center sitting in 911 dispatch where the nine one dispatcher could transfer calls to that person to have a discussion. But it didn't it wasn't a space where we would had someone to send out. It was more someone to answer questions and engage with those people who are calling. In this case, if someone calls 911, they will transfer. If it's the appropriate call, they will transfer it to the NSC and we'll take those calls. Thank you. I know my time's up, but thank you. Thank you, Councilman Austin. Thank you. And I want to thank you for the very thorough report. I think there was maybe, oh, 45 slides on that. A lot of good information. And I think it speaks to. Burn Long Beach in our city actually you know investing in and having a plan that everyone home task force was put together. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And all of those who served on that that task force gave us some guidelines and framework and goals to to achieve. I think in many respects we have we're definitely on the right track, especially when you think about just the shelter beds and transitional housing opportunities that have been created in the last just a couple of years. Uh, I want to say that I think. That when it comes to this issue of dealing with homelessness and the unhoused, we need to maintain and continue to be flexible and adaptable with our programing and governance over this issue, because the resources are not unlimited, they're not abundant, and we don't have many opportunities to get it right. Right. And so I want to caution us from, you know, creating a program and being married to that being the only solution to to fixing this issue. We need to be continue to be adaptable, because I can assure you that the challenge that we face, those who are on house are not, you know , in a square box. We're going to have to move to be able to move it around. And oftentimes, I think I've been on this council long enough to see us create initiatives before we even had the opportunity to assess to determine whether that initiative is working. We've created a new one and a new one, and we started layering on top of initiatives. And so I want to be mindful that, you know, that's something that I've been paying attention to watching. I think so. In some respects, we need to. Take a step back in and allow the good work that this council, this community has supported to actually manifest and then determine whether or not we need to do something extra. I just wanted to add add those comments. Again, I do appreciate this report and look forward to the implementation. They did have one question. Related to goal number four, employing people. There is a. Initiative in progress to hire a reentry coordinator. Can you explain a little bit about what that individual will be doing? The the target population, the goals set forth, particularly for that position, because I think that reentry is is an area of focus that we need to take to actually put as a priority and to just look at the data coming from L.A. County and CCR. We have a lot of folks that are reentering our community who will need these services. So the entry, the reentry coordinator is actually being funded to the racial equity and reconciliation funding. It's part of that process within the violence prevention area at the health department. And so the goal and the long term goal is to establish a sort of a11 stop shop for people who are reentering from incarcerated settings to support employment , housing and many other things. Those resources have not yet been identified to go that far. So at this point, it's really it's an individual who will be working closely with nonprofit organizations and others to start to build a more coordinated capacity to be able to serve people as they're exiting incarcerated settings. I think you'll all be watching that process very carefully, because I think it's very important that we like I said, we get it right. We don't have very many options and opportunities like we have right now. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Sorrell. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Ms.. Collopy and Mr. R.S. for the presentation. And can you you know, I've heard this answered several times, but if you can answer it again, how many times is outreach? Does outreach get done to an individual before services is accepted? So this was and this is something that gets thrown around. And I don't know that it's the most impactful answer truthfully. And, you know, it varies. 15 to 20 is what people say. However, that's kind of an averaging. So what we find is people either are willing to engage right away or it takes a whole lot of times more like 30, 40 times that somebody is very hesitant for a number of reasons. We are working with people with a significant amount of trauma, a lot of disappointment within our social services as a whole throughout their life. So there's a number of different reasons why somebody might be hesitant to engage with us. So I think as Councilmember Austin kind of said, we need to look at various different approaches, not being married to any one particular approach, but that people have a wide range of different experiences and backgrounds. So creating programs that engage people in different ways and really making sure that each program really takes a trauma informed friends to recognize people's histories, what they've gone through and really recognizing. And allowing that person to express from that viewpoint and not be reactive to it. And that's why I really appreciate this Slide 34, where the goal is to develop population based service model. And I had hoped that maybe there would be a little bit more. But I do think that it does it really gets down to kind of what you're speaking about, ensuring that it's really addressing their individual experience and also situation that range is not, you know, from older adults to transition you to LGBT, LGBTQ reentry, single parents, veterans, etc.. Right. I really love to see more of it being kind of flushed out. The other two is just with what you just shared in. I know the team does so much work, you know, the city staff do so much work. So at the end of the day, how do we communicate to everyday people, residents, businesses that walk down our street or drive down our street, see people living on the street, or at least people who are unhappy? And how's that? You know that what we're doing is working. How do we communicate that to to to our residents? Right. That is probably not reading this report or reading the numbers or understanding the statistics. How do we how is that communicated that what we're doing is working as councilmember? So that is one area that when you are in direct service models, we often don't have the time and the capacity to do the level of communication that you're talking about. And we fully understand the importance of that. And happy to say that the health department now has a peer. But Arpaio has been heavily involved in COVID response rate and has not been able to create as much of the other kinds of conversations. We've had multiple conversations about sort of campaigns, right, about sharing about all the work that we're doing and others, but that has been put on the back burner in the last year. That is something we will be focusing on moving forward. Though I hope we do prioritize that because I think that it's really important that we share the different various work and because there's so much money also invested in this that it's so important we communicate all of the various approaches that has to be taken and needs to be taken. No further comment or question. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Mongo. Thank you. So when we move from the Hart team to the Reach team, how will we have a consistency of data reporting? So currently, earlier this evening, the fire department replaced their data system, but that's a data system that the Health Department doesn't have access to. Or are we going to give them access? How do we track these? Calls and contacts longitudinally when we're changing our methodology. Perhaps you guys can work on that and give you. A capsule on Mongo? Yeah. We haven't been asked for that data as of yet, but we are looking forward to sharing that data. We would like to see also if it's working and if it's not working, how we can get it to work better. That would be great. And then I really appreciate the discussion around funding from the measure H For all the different components of our city that have had increased costs, including, you noted, 200% increase in fires. I know L.A. City had a and a news show and I think they talked about a 600%. I don't know if that was on Channel seven. And I think that perhaps there's an appropriate opportunity for some discussions among the fire chiefs to really come together and discuss the environmental and regional impacts. And then I know that Supervisor Barger had an agenda item related to clear out on county property that would not take the standard 14 to 21 days when a brush fire risk is adjacent. And I don't know that we're really using that. I know I've talked with a few of my council colleagues about some of the issues we have related to the Nature Center. We've worked with P.D., but those fires are still happening on a regular basis underneath those trees, and we've already had multiple fires. So being able to reimburse some foam from the funding, I think is a reasonable request. And I think if we went in with a three or four agency approach, we might be successful. So I, I look forward to hearing what that might look like and then also having a better system in place for identifying those risks more quickly and making sure that we don't have as many of those fires because of the a dual impacts. There's also a lot of risk to the individuals that are homeless when a fire breaks out. So let's get that process memorialized. Thank you. Yeah, I totally agree with you. And in fact, we have the public safety committee meeting coming up at the end of the month, and that is the topic that we're going to be addressing from the fire department, because regionally, the fires have been growing exponentially. And we've spoken to some of the council members about all of these vegetation fires and how they're impacting. Us, our. Run load, our resources and all the rest of that. So we do have our support services staff looking at ways to get reimbursement for that. And once we do, I'll get back to you that information. And I appreciate that. And I know that when the funding first became available, there was an effort at that time and it just we didn't have the volume that we have today. And I think a new day is here and we can make a new effort. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Ringo. Thank you. I also want to add my voice to the accomplishment of putting this report together very thoroughly. Very informative. A lot of information here that I'm going to have to dove a little deeper into with the author. But there's two things that stand out to me in terms of some of your goals here. Employ people and connect to health. I mean, those are important things that are always here when I'm out there in terms of why are these so many people homeless, what's going on, why they need a job? And some of those people also have some kind of mental health issues, whether it's substance abuse or or just some other kind of a diagnosis that they might have in terms of of their mental health. So one thing that came out to here that I that I saw here and it's like 27, was that there's a homeless court pilot. With the city prosecutor's office. What is that? Could you describe it for a little bit to what it is? Sure. We received a some funding through the D.A. Hahn's office, Supervisor Hines office through the L.A.. Community Development Agency. So that funding comes to the health department and we are partnering with the city prosecutor's office. So we have a judge who joins us by video conferencing and people can request to have their misdemeanor heard within that court. And basically, the focus is on really making sure that people are getting connected and to services and resolving issues that related to that legal issue that they're now facing. So that's the main focus. However, we partner with other aspects of the Los Angeles criminal justice system, including the. The county public defender has a program to focus on expungements. They come out to the homeless court as well. So we have met with over ten people that are focusing on expunging past convictions that way, when they're going to get employment, when they're working on housing, that that's not showing up on their background check and potentially affecting their ability to access either of those. We also are able to clear warrants for a no show and re-issue that for a future court date which might be at homeless court. We also have a number liccardo to show up to provide additional case management as well as we have are a partnership with the county to have a probation officer at the multi-service center 20 hours a week. So people that are also on probation that may have a probation issue, they're able to check in at the multi-service center as well. So all of those are offered at our homeless court, which occurs on the third Wednesday of each month. So we have done two so far. This month will be our third. How do they get that information? Is it. Because of some kind of contact that you probably had with one of the homeless person who says, I can't get a job because I have a record. Is that is that when you direct them towards the court? Yeah. So it comes up in our conversations. We have also there's been several press stories and presentations regarding this. So as we're out on outreach, engaging people around their legal needs, if people want to sign up for homeless court, there is a way to go on to the city prosecutor site and sign up to have your case heard the process and then assigned to that court. The other part about collecting to help you have here that there's an ongoing partnership and advocacy with the L.A. County Department of Mental Health to get some more on substance abuse facilities in Long Beach. What requirements do. You need to have to open up a mental health facility here in Long Beach? I know we have one. It's in my district. I support it because I think it's important. But is there another is there another effort to open up another one? And what is the requirements, if any, to open up a mental health facility here? Councilmember There are two. The requirements are different for mental health and for substance use. So they're run by to the department. The L.A. County Department of Mental Health is a full department with a focus area, and then the substance abuse area actually lands within the public health department within within L.A. County. They are you know, they focus primarily on the Medicaid and unfunded population. And those are three with high level needs in terms of the substance use providers. They have to go through a licensing process at the state level, which is not easy. But we're hearing it's quite, quite complicated. The county does work with organizations who are interested to to work them through that process and provide them some guidelines. I don't know what the requirements are for the mental health side. We have the Behavioral Health Urgent Care Clinic, which is in it, which is in your district. And then but there are many other mental health providers. One Damage has a site that's near the health department that's a direct service provider, but they also fund many other nonprofits within the city of Long Beach around mental health services. So it's a real mix. And then so like the MHRA, you know, Mental Health America and others all have contracts with with the image to be able to provide those services. Thinking the time is up and we'll move on to the next member. If you want to queue up again. Councilmember. If if you need to be. Richardson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This is a big, big issue. And, you know, I had a lot to say and I was looking at that five minute clock. But I want to go back and lift up, you know, one or two points that I really want to talk about. First of all, I'm glad to hear the health department has a PIO. It's pretty important at this moment that we're able to communicate out to the public during a pandemic. It's great to have a public health department. A lot of folks, a lot of cities don't have it. Now they're looking at Long Beach to say, what do we need to do to do it? One thing I mentioned earlier is having our own like contracting in mental health services from the county. I want to go back to that. You know, I saw a presentation recently about the Trinity Mental Health Partnership. It's a three city JPA between Pomona, Laverne and Claremont. And for the purposes of this JPA, they're they're independent. They for the purposes of mental health funding from the state and for reimbursements from Medicare and Medicaid. And the way that the reason I think that's interesting is that we've seen the fact that we have our own health department and our own continuum of care. We've been able to amplify the amount of resources that we bring here to Long Beach for public health and for homelessness. And I think with the issues related to mental health in our communities, I think we have to explore what happens if we're fully in charge, not necessarily getting approvals from the county to be innovative or to invest more in mental health. And so I want to drive that home. I want to I would love to explore, you know, because you've done a great job here at everyone home with over at home report. We certainly need to look at. You know, moving past the partnerships we have in establishing our own independent mental health bureau or mental health department within our health department. What are your initial thoughts on this, on this idea? I think it's certainly something that we're, you know, willing to to investigate. And along the way, we have had multiple conversations with the AMA and the funding makes sense to be to be carved out. So there's only one other one city jurisdiction on their own that receives mental health funding at Berkley. They did started a long time ago and they got their carve out of the all the state mental health funding. So I don't know what that approach looks like at the state level to be able to carve that out outside of the out of the L.A. County piece. But it's something that we could look at what those steps would be, and then we can report back. Okay. Yeah, I would love to. I would love to see that, particularly because we have such a great track record and one of only three cities in the whole state with a health department. I think we have a good story to tell on. As in, we should be thinking about being more entrepreneurial about how we can handle it. If we give us the funding, it probably gets directly to the street faster. And we can we can locally control our own outreach around mental health. I think that's that's an idea that certainly demands some research. So so thank you so much. The last thing that I kind of glossed over before it's an idea that's come up time and time again is we do a lot of housing in the city and it's spread across two departments. Where are we with the conversation about unifying and having one housing department where there's one shared vision between the production of housing and the servicing servicing of and the education around housing units? Is there an update on the feasibility of that? Mr. Modica. It's an idea that we've talked about a little bit. I think that would come with some significant resources. So we kind of consider that if there was going to be a large investment maybe by property owners or by the state or by others, where we really can can create a department. Departments are are wonderful and they really provide a service, but they require a lot of backbone infrastructure to do that. So that is something that if we were to get a large revenue source, we could certainly consider. Thank you. Is that our vice mayor? Yes, councilman, sir? Yes. I just have one more question. I was wondering, is copy if you can give an example of a call that 901 receives that would go straight to the REACH team. An example of a call that would go straight to fire instead. So that would go to fire instead of the REACH team. I can't remember what the exact designation happened and it's like six or seven or something like that. But it's, it's, it's termed in a way that probably is a little misleading. So I'm more just describe it. So somebody calls in and says, Somebody in my neighborhood is experiencing homelessness, and I'm concerned about that. They'll ask a number of questions to make sure that there's no concern of, you know, safety or any illegal, illegal activity occurring like that. Somebody says this person looks suspicious. They'll ask a number of questions that they kind of dig down of what does that mean and suggest that you're concerned that this person is in your neighborhood . So no major concerns are identified. Those would be calls that normally would have been transferred to PD, will now be referred over to the REACH team and then on fire. And so there's a complete matrix that the dispatchers go through. And so if they determine in any way, shape or form that it's medical in nature, then it will come to the fire department and we'll go out and evaluate the patient first. It becomes problematic when some of the callers are unable or unwilling to approach the patients, because at that point we can't really determine are they having a medical emergency or not. And so more often than not, the fire department is going to be rolling out on that that type of response. Thank you. And Americans, I would want to point out that heart and reach are very different. They're not a replacement. We're not replacing heart with reach. We're looking at a different service model. The heart model is really a medical response model was an innovation that we didn't have at the time. And it was really designed to help lighten the load with our firefighters who were responding to these calls because there wasn't anyone else to go to those. As we look towards reach one with a budget reduction, but also it was to look at more of a case management model, and that really is the REACH model. It's an alternative to police. It's an alternative to fire. It's also a model where you have actual homeless outreach workers who can then do more of that kind of mobile connection to services, as well as mental health as well as nursing. So they are very different. We're not looking at just taking, you know, firefighters and replacing them with with nursing staff or health staff. It is a different model that we're looking to take that next level of innovation. Thank you. Councilman. Sir, anything. Else? No further questions. Thank you. That was the only one. Thank you, Councilwoman Pryce. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I was wondering what the status of the bed fap item that I brought to council a couple of years ago. Councilmember. We started that process through the search process, as you remember. And through that process, what we found out was that the providers were not interested in participating. So a real time build up requires that the providers enter the information and engage with the app and the business. There was not a lot of interest. The team did reach out to a number of different providers and to others. So that was a key piece around the mental health and substance use space. We do have more in insight around sheltering and the folks that the areas that we are funding through our other service provision model. So we have been looking more at stronger technology to connect people to services, unite us into other things. But the better conversation, there was not really any incentive because we don't fund the mental health and substance use providers and others to engage in that app with us. And so that piece of it has has not moved forward. So is that the difference between Long Beach and other cities that are using the real app, that other cities are directly funding into the providers and we're not? I think that there are they may just have other providers in that space that they've been able to connect with or engage with, or they may be funding them to engage in those services moving forward. We did the initial outreach and there just wasn't an interest in Long Beach. We continue to watch and to pay attention and to look at to look at other options, to be able to connect people to services. We have very tight relationships with with all of those providers in the city of Long Beach. And so through the case management and outreach and other connections, we do everything we can to connect them as quickly as possible. Okay. And then in terms of the number of beds that we have available, do we have beds available on a daily basis if somebody wanted shelter? It varies from day to day. We have a number of pets within Long Beach that have very specific criteria. So a lot of the times those beds are available, however, and months or a veteran, unless you're experiencing or fleeing from domestic violence, those beds may not be available if you do not meet those care characteristics. As far as our beds that are more general as an access, it does vary. There are some days where we have a number of beds due to somebody leaving the shelter, moving into housing. There are other days where we might have no women's beds, we may have no men's beds. It just varies from time to time as we're coming along, people that are vulnerable and are looking for a bed. If we don't have one available that night, we have been utilizing our motel vouchers to continue to engage that person and work towards with them until a bed does become available. So we do our best when people are looking for a bed to get them into a place immediately while we navigate towards an open bed. And so how are we how are our first responders who are tasked with enforcement able to determine whether or not there is availability or shelter space before? Choosing an enforcement action pursuant to Boise and Judge Judge Carter directives and best practices that we have seen. That's somewhat of a difficult conversation. I think it's much easier to do in the daytime. It becomes much more difficult in the evening time as our system just is not currently funded to operate 24 seven. So just depending on time of the day, it can be really difficult to determine when a bed bed is available. We have a number of beds within our winter shelter program that are set aside for PD as well as we do engage in as somebody reaches out from enforcement or other community services looking for a bed for somebody at an off hours, we will typically work and try to coordinate, but it can be difficult outside of our working hours. And I do want to point out for the record that our homeless shelters are not full and we track that every single day. We're we're getting closer now. But throughout the pandemic, we've been at 60%. We have availability for motel vouchers. So when we are taking enforcement actions, we absolutely do have shelter beds available in our community. You know, the data we do wish sometimes we'd like to know exactly how many, but we definitely have them available when we take enforcement action. And that's thank you for clarifying that. I think that's really important because a lot of times the enforcement action is going to take place after hours because the law violation oftentimes is tied to it the hour of the day. So if they're at a particular public park or the public beach that's closed at a certain time, the enforcement action would be based on the municipal code, which would necessitate it being after hours. So as long as I think our officers have that information of what resources they have available to them so that we can make sure that we're compliant, I think that's fantastic. Thank you. Thank you. Let me just have a couple a couple of questions. Also, I think the comments have been really, really great. And I want to just start by thanking our health team. I think it's been obviously a great job. I know it's not just the health department, but it's all departments in the city are involved in the work of ensuring that we get as many people into housing as possible and really focus on ensuring that unhoused folks have all the resources they need. It is obviously a even more difficult situation that we're in because of the pandemic. And I was just wanted to ask and also just uplift a few items in the report. One is, I think that having this update was great to kind of go through and see. I know I've had a chance to see the update and I want to make sure that for a project and task force of this significance that went that we have updates around this issue, you know, as often as possible, whether it's every year, whether it's every other year. We need a check in. At least the council needs to on this particular report. My other suggestion is the the task force was made up of so many folks from across the community that I think would also be great. At some point, I know we have some restrictions because of the pandemic. But to bring that group together, whether it's virtually or whether it's at some point in person, and to have just to give them a direct update, but also get additional feedback as to how they think we are doing and the progress that we're making in the within this within this report. I want to just uplift, I think. Corby, I think you and the team have done and other members of the department have done a great job, particularly on Project Homekey. I think it's been a huge success not just to see our our project, but the county partnership projects also have been phenomenal and I've said I support more project homekey projects in development. I hope that we're able with this money coming down the pipeline right now from the state and the federal government, we need to add and purchase more hotels or motels and convert them to housing for people that are unhoused. And I think that that is something that is, in my opinion, the the biggest bang for our buck is to get a hold of these motels and hotels and convert them into housing. And so I'm really hoping that we're really putting our best foot forward. I know we have a list of maybe three or four other acquisitions that we would like, and I'm just very supportive of this and hope that we continue to to push on these on these new housing opportunities. Let me also just say that. The one. Well, there's a lot of success in the report and a lot of success in the progress where I think we we just have to do better. I know it's not for lack of trying, but I can't express how important it is to have detox and sobering centers available in our community. And I understand that sometimes it's a difficult conversation for some neighborhoods or some for. I've talked to community members who don't like the idea, and I unfortunately just disagree with that. And I can't tell you that. Giving. Having a safe space for people that are suffering, that are sick and that need help within our community is incredibly important. We are also also just it's a plain resource issue when we have paramedics or. Or folks for it from our city, having to take folks to a sobering center or a detox center that is in downtown Los Angeles. The amount of time that that takes. It is costing us valuable resources versus being able to take someone to a sobering center or detox bed within our within our city. And so I just want to know that we are kind of all hands on deck on on this issue and that we are working with our partners in the health care space to add to identify these detox beds and sobering centers. And and that we are a part of that acquisition. Is there. Is there any progress we are making here or anything that we can assist with in this area? I think that the easier of the two would be the sobering center. So it has far less restrictions, different funding mechanisms than others. And that is certainly something that we could be looking into more immediately in terms in terms of access, we have been looking at a number of different locations just for various service models, and that would be something to look at. Medical detox is a very is a much different conversation in terms of how it's funded, how it's funded through Medi-Cal, the systems that L.A. County has in place to find those systems, they're expensive. There are only three in all of L.A. County, and they're very, very difficult to access. So that is something that we've had multiple conversations but made no progress. They just basically have said about the funding doesn't work that way and that no one is interested in providing that. So I think the first place would be the sobering center. And then we continue to push on a detox conversation. Well, think I think we should look at look to our our all of our our hospital partners as well across the city or medical center partners, I think. Ms.. If you're looking at, what is it, 12 beds on the for the for the sobering center, is that right? It's the original conversations were told that, yes. I mean, even to start, it would be, you know, and so I just am hoping that we that we continue to push on that. So thank you for for for that. And then finally, I do hope at some point we can address the issue of services or access for, you know, 24, seven for people that need assistance and support. I know that we there are some challenges there, but folks that are that are expressing homelessness should be able to access the multi-service center. Every day of the week and past what are considered regular business hours. I know that is hard to do, but I just hope that we continue to push and that we open the services up and meet folks when they need the support. Not necessarily when our traditional work hours are. And so those are just things that I want to uplift. But overall, quite frankly, you guys are doing an incredible job. The whole team at the health department. Thank you for for this report and this work. We look forward to meeting all those other obstacles and challenges. Councilman Mongo. Thank you. The mayor brings up some excellent points. I know that alternate destinations have not been a popular thing at the state level. If we wanted to transport to a detox bed, that's. Is it my understanding that that's currently not an available option for our fire department? That's correct. That's not currently available to us. There have been pilot programs throughout the region. I don't know that there are any pilot programs going on at this point in time. So the County of Los Angeles currently has a pilot program. It started during COVID and on every EP, C.R., they have a tool where they can push a button and get a assessment from a medical doctor, whether it is either the medical director of the department, one of the two assistant doctors, or a physician's assistant that makes that assessment and then determines that that transport would be allowed. And so it may be something we want to explore. It wasn't an expensive system, and they pay by the minute. So you don't have to load up a bunch of cash to do it. Their foundation actually fronted the money to start the program, and during COVID, when they were trying to not transport to hospitals, it was tremendously a tremendous resource to be able to go to urgent care or any of those other things, because while it is outside the scope of a paramedic, having the availability to do a virtual consult with a doctor became an amazing resource. I don't know if the funding would be available for this to do that, but great tool and potentially mental health services or the County. Quality or. Productivity Commission would be interested in funding it, and I'd be happy to help. Thank you. Definitely something we're going to look and do. I'll get together with our medical director and we'll get through that. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. There's a motion and a second. I don't believe there is public comment on this item. There's a motion any second to receive in favor of the report. And please cast your votes. Motion carry.

Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by adding Chapter 9.61, relating to Social Hosting Responsibility, read and adopted as read. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_01072014_14-0021

23 and 23 is a recommended recommendation to declare in order to maintain. Really just exit a little quietly. Thank you. Go ahead. It's a recommendation to amend the municipal code relating to social hosting responsibility. Read the first time and lead over to the next regular meeting of the City Council. Okay. Mr. OFF You're trying to cut off hosting, are you? Second Yes, I do believe there are a couple of people who want to speak on this issue. This is the first reading of a issue that we brought forth several months ago for then asked the city attorney to draft an ordinance. And it basically addresses the issue of yeah, it addresses the issue of adults providing alcohol to underage drinkers in the presence of their their their residents and their debts and penalties that go in place with this, as well as hopefully some awareness so we can cut down on underage drinking, but also deal with some some cultural issues . This was brought to my attention by the Cambodian Association of America. And I know I think there are a couple of people who want to speak on this matter. Yes. No matter how good. Such good I would move for. I would as I would second. Yes. Move for adoption of this facility. We have a second. And a second. Move. Second, any member of the public wish to address the Council on item 23. You better hope there is somebody here. Oh. Been taken. They couldn't take it. All right. Any any public comment saying none members cast your votes that item 23. Councilmember Neill, thank you. Maybe they all went home. Motion carries eight votes. The next item is the House as well. Yeah. Okay. We're going to go to hearing item number two to read. You guys haven't been drinking, have you? Yeah. So you really were here? Yeah. Oh. Okay. Thank you. That hearing. I'd have never to go read it. That would be you.

Councilor Fernandes Anderson called Docket #00485, message and order, referred on April 13, 2022 Docket #0488, approving an appropriation of Five Hundred Fifty Million Three Hundred Seventy Thousand Dollars ($550,370,000.00) for the acquisition of interests in land or the acquisition of assets, or the landscaping, alteration, remediation, rehabilitation improvement of public land, the construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, improvement, alteration, remodeling, enlargement, demolition, removal or extraordinary repairs of public buildings, facilities, assets, works or infrastructure; for the cost of feasibility studies or engineering or architectural services for plans and specifications; for the development, design, purchase and installation of computer hardware or software and computer-assisted integrated financial management and accounting systems; and any and all cost incidental or related to the above described projects; for the purposes of various city departments included Boston Center for Youth and Families, Department of Innovation and Technology, Environment, Fire, Neig

BostonCC_04132022_2022-0485

So I could number 0485 message in order approving an appropriation of $550,370,000 for the acquisition of interest in land or acquisition of assets or the landscaping, alteration, remediation, rehabilitation, improvement of public land, the construction reconstruction, rehabilitation improvement alteration, remodeling, enlargement, demolition removal or extraordinary repairs of public buildings, facilities, assets, works, or infrastructure for the cost of feasibility studies or engineering or architectural services for plans and specifications. For the development, design, purchase and installation of computer hardware and software and computer assisted integrated financial management and accounting systems. And any and all costs, incidental or related to the above described projects for the purposes of various city departments, including Boston Center for Youth and Families, Department of Innovation and Technology, Environment, Failure, Neighborhood Development, Office of Arts and Culture, Parks and Recreation. Police, Property Management, Public Works and Transportation Departments. Boston Public Library. Boston Redevelopment Authority and Public Health Commission. Filed in the Office of the City Clerk on April 11th, 2022.

A bill for an ordinance approving a Purchase and Sale Agreement between the City and County of Denver and TMC Enterprises, LLC for the building located at 12025 East 45th Avenue. (FINANCE & SERVICES) The last regularly scheduled Council meeting within the 30-day review period is on 12-8-14. The Committee approved filing this bill by consent on 11-6-14.

DenverCityCouncil_11242014_14-0924

Thank you, Mr. President. This is an ordinance to purchase a building for 911 purposes will house the call receivers and dispatch information. I do not oppose the actual purchase of this building, but it is a package deal. It also will be coming with a bill that for payment requires certificates of participation to be floated and in fact they will be floated over what the cost of the building actually is to incorporate some of the money that will be required for the for remodeling this building. We will, according to the Department of Finance, end up when it's when they it's structured the way they expect. Probably pay about $4 million in interest. And we have such a rich budget this year, I don't see any reason why a safety measure should have to be floated in debt. And certificates of participation are a very, very sensitive matter for me because I believe they are a way to get around the TABOR constitutional amendment to avoid a public vote on debt. And so I will be opposing this ordinance. Thank you, Councilwoman Fox. Are there any other questions? Councilwoman Ortega. I do have a question and I'm not sure who is here from finance, but my question is about the fact that we normally pledge different city buildings until the debt is paid off. And I'd like to know what properties are being set aside for that purpose. So can someone from that. I'm happy to take that sky. Stuart Mayor's office as councilman fox reference. The actual bill to set up the copy will not be coming to council till January and at that time we will identify the buildings included in it. I don't have a list now and I think they're still working through that, but that will be provided when the actual bill for the CLP comes forward. Okay. So this is just asking us to approve this, not just the purchase and. Sale and. Purchase of the new building. Correct. Just acquisition. Thank you. Good, councilwoman. Yeah. Okay. Any other comments and questions are on 924. Scene on Madam Secretary. Roll call. Facts. No. Can each layman write Lopez Montero. Nevitt. Hi. Ortega. I Rob Shepherd. Assessment by Brookes. Hi. Mr. President, I. Councilwoman Ortega. I'm sorry. Thank you, Madam Secretary. Please close the volume. And now the. Result. 11 eyes, one ni, 11 eyes. One day, 9/24, when placed upon final consideration and does pass to the next one. Thank you, Madam Secretary. 961 Councilwoman Fox, what would you like for us to do with this? Please put on the floor for a vote. Certainly in council members. Could you please put 961 on the floor for final consideration and do pass?

Adoption of Resolution Approving and Adopting the Operating and Capital Budget for Fiscal Years (FYs) 2021-22 and 2022-23; [City Council] and Adoption of Resolution Approving and Adopting the Budget for FYs 2021-22 and 2022-23; [SACIC] and Adoption of Resolution Approving Workforce Changes and Amending the Management and Confidential Employees Association (MCEA) Salary Schedule in FYs 2021-22 and 2022-23 Effective July 1, 2021. [City Council] (Finance 2410)

AlamedaCC_06152021_2021-1002

Adoption resolution approving in adopting the operating capital budget for fiscal year 21, 22 and 2223 for the City Council, and then also the operating budget for the CIC and adoption of resolution approving workforce changes and amending the Management and Confidential Employees Association salary schedule. Thank you. And I see that we're joined by our finance director and he to welcome is too. And also by Robert Vance from Public Works. Yeah. And Aaron Smith Public Works director they're all. And. We've got of course we still have Jennifer tell. So Mr. are you are you leading off on this one? Yes. Thank you very much, Mayor Sears Pratt. Good evening. Members of the City Council and City Manager Levitt, assistant city manager, building, city attorney and members of the public. Thank you for giving me this opportunity to present the budget to you. This is my very first year with the city and very pleased to report that the the executive team and the team Almeida is just very wonderful to work with, very pleased that we are able to work collaboratively to develop this fiscal year. 2122 budget. The operating and capital budgets are were developed based on a lot of collaboration between the departments and it was great to see so much cooperation from city staff. The proposed general fund budget for fiscal year 2122 is approximately one $112 million and $115 million for fiscal year 2223, with the proposed employees totaling about 470 470 employees. I would like to give special thanks to the City Manager Levitt and Assistant City Manager Bo Dean for their guidance and leadership in developing this budget. And this is the first year that we were able to use open govt to develop the budget. It went very smoothly and Genova town did a lot of heavy lifting to make it possible. So I would really like to thank Jennifer for her words and also I would like to give special thanks to Public Works Director and what it means for the development of the capital budget. It looks beautiful. I've seen the draft copy. It just looks very well put together and I wanted to make sure that what? That I want to thank all the residents of Alameda for their input as well. Without their input, we wouldn't have been able to develop this fiscal year 21, 23 operating and capital budget. And we are able to do so by preserving critical and essential services supporting the Alameda residents and businesses during these unprecedented times. So thank you all for your leadership and support. And with that, I'd like to turn over to our wonderful budget manager, Ms.. Jenna Patel. Thank you. Thank you. Finance Director, you need to. Hello again, Madam Mayor. And Council Members and the Finance Department. I'll provide a brief overview of the proposed to your operating budget and changes to the budget that have been made based on direction provided to council at the Budget Workshops on May 11th and 20th. Then I will turn it over to Public Works to provide an overview of the Capital Improvement Program Budget. Next slide. Next slide. Jennifer. General fund expenditures are proposed at $114.4 million in the first year of the budget and $118.7 million in the year to the largest category of the operating budget is employee salaries and benefits, followed by operating expenditures for services and supplies. Next slide. Citywide. The budget is proposed at $272 million in the first year and $273.2 million in the second year. These amounts include entire fund transfers and annual allocations for capital projects. Amounts do not include carry forward of encumbrances of existing appropriations. The proposed budget resolution provides for encumbrances for valid purchase orders and contracts in effect as of June 30th to be carried forward into the following fiscal year budget. Next slide. For this budget cycle, we are implementing an online budget, but as finance director two mentioned and this will provide for web based navigation of the budget, we will also publish a PDF version of the budget by the web and PDF versions of the adopted budget will be available on the Finance Department's website by July 1st, and many of the budget summary reports that will be included in the budget book are available to view now on the city's Open Govt transparency portal. Next slide. As mentioned earlier, these are the only changes to the city manager's recommended budget that have been incorporated in this proposed operating budget as staff received direction from City Council at the May budget workshops. Additional changes to the capital budget will be discussed by public works. The operating budget changes include funding for the Civic Spark, fellow Almeida, Family Services, mental health support, police auditor and reform measures, and a one time allocation for the land tax. I will now turn it over to ising civil engineer Robert Vance and public works to discuss the capital budget. Thank you, Jennifer. And good evening, Madam Mayor and city council members. Can we have the next time, please? I'm Robert Hanssen, the supervising simpleton here in public works. And I manage our capital improvement budget. And tonight I'd like to review the capital budget and some of the changes as directed in the budget workshops in May. Next slide, please. The proposed capital improvement program. Budget totals approximately $67 million over the two year period, including more than $18 million in grant funding. It also includes $1.2 million per year in general fund contributions, which is approximately 3 to 4% each year of the capital budget. The general funds are supporting projects such as our street lighting program, Urban Forest Management and our park and playground improvements. The budget also supports several city council priorities, including traffic safety, climate action and resiliency, recreation and park facility improvements and element of point infrastructure. Exhibit three for this item includes an overview of the budget for the full budget and one page descriptions for each project. And the next slide, please. The resources are shown on the left hand side of the screen. Many of those sources are restricted in nature. For example, sewer services go toward sanitary sewer rehabilitation program. There are transportation related funds through Measure B and vehicle registration taxes and other fuel taxes and other dedicated funds. On the right hand side, as shown, some of the project categories that we have and approximately half of the budget is dedicated to transportation projects. About 20% is for the sanitary sewer program and then shown here about 11% for building facilities, 2% for parks, and the remaining for stormwater projects and sea level rise adaptation. Looks like things. Here to show some of the changes to the capital budget based on the the workshops. The first is are matching funds for a safety improvement project, which is approximately a $250,000 grants that we are receiving through Caltrans. There are also general fund contributions for the urban forests to support species specific tree trimming and increased funding for the urban forest master plan. Update. The budget also includes increases for park maintenance to support park improvements and amenities at parks. There's a budget reduction shown here for $400,000 per year. This is based on the updated agreement with Rita that was discussed on the May 4th city council meeting. These were capital funds that for parking lot improvements that will now be funded through the operating budget. And finally, the grant, a grant for the West End bicycle and pedestrian crossing project, which totals $1.555 million, which is a grant through Alameda, CTSI, which will be discussed later in tonight's meeting. And with that, I'd like to close and. Take any questions you might have. Thank you, everyone, for your presentations. So I know, Councilman Knox, I think you had a had a question. Why don't you lead? I will ask it again. So I just wanted to confirm that tonight's presentation is consistent with the direction we gave at the end of our last two workshops. Yes. Yes, that's correct. Thank you. Okay. Any questions, Councilmember Desai? Well, thank you. And is this kind of similar to the question raised by Councilmember Knox, but more focused, particularly on the park maintenance issue, the $200,000 a year, one $200,000 year or two. My understanding of that was that it was for the for the tennis court resurfacing and pickleball, but that the Parks Commission is going to kind of weigh in and give us the read their recommendation. So is that correct? That's what I recall. But Mr. Vanska head now, you guys. Thank you. Yeah, that's my understanding of the of the direction was that it was an increase in funding for park improvements with the specific projects to be determined at a later date. Okay. Councilmember Knox, what does your hand go up against? Yeah, I just wanted to pick up on the nuance that Mr. Grant's said, which is it's for it's not specifically for tennis court or pickleball. It's for projects that the Parks and Rec Department or Commission identify, which could be beyond that. Just so that there was clarity on what they were, Jarmusch was. Okay. All for you, Councilmember. Now, I disagree. That's it. Okay. Vice mayor of L.A.. So you had. That. I was just going to clarify the direction relative to the parks, which were not quite recovered. Okay. All right. Any other clarifying question before we go to public comment? Okay. Madam Kirk, do we have public comment on this item? We have two speakers. The first up, number three is Linda Carter Loney. All right. Good evening, Speaker Carr Loney. And so right now we just have three speakers. Everyone gets up to 3 minutes. Good evening. We're ready. Yes. This is Linda. Cannelloni. I live in Alameda and I am a member of the board of directors of the Golden Gate Audubon Society. Unless I'm mistaken, the budget does not include funding for the master planning of the park. So I'm here to urge the Council to fund $250,000 in this year's budget for the master planning of DuPage Park has long been promised. But not yet implemented. Do you pay? Park represents a unique opportunity to sequester carbon. Accommodate sea level rise. Provide habitat for wildlife. And to give us a special place to teach and learn about nature as well as a place for people to experience the peace of natural areas, which is, of course, a rare opportunity in the inner bay area. The impact this is a special place because it's whatever we do it deep will be magnified by the fact that the VA is creating and improving the adjacent wetlands, which makes the total area much more impactful than the sum of the two areas the city leads to, in. My opinion. Live, live up to its climate emergency declaration and its Climate Action Plan, which specifically calls out debate, park and fund the amount needed for master planning in order to better position the park to obtain grant funding for its. Construction. Thank you. Thank you. And our next speaker. Jacqueline Zipkin. Good evening, Speaker Zipkin. Good evening, Madam Mayor, and honorable councilmembers. My name is Jackie Zipkin and I'm an Alameda resident. Tonight, I'm speaking on behalf of Transform Alameda and I appreciate the opportunity to comment on the city's proposed budget for the next two fiscal years. While we appreciate all the hard work that went into crafting this budget and balancing priorities, I wanted to highlight a disconnect relative to specific direction provided previously by Council on Police Reform and Equity. Item six SI Later in your agenda lays out progress that's been made by staff in addressing concerns by the community, raised by the community and following Council's explicit direction. However, several important items discussed in that staff report have budget implications, yet no funds for those items have been allocated in the proposed budget. Specifically in the staff report for item six, C staff recommends 100,000 for facilitating development of Citizen's Police Account Accountability Board and 20,000 to create citizen's oversight out of the city manager's office until there can be a more formal citizen's oversight body established. These are important steps to implementing. The steering committee is a number one recommendation, and it's something the council has repeatedly formally endorsed. Yet, as we understand it, no funding for this effort is actually included in this budget and council would need to return to identify further appropriations. We want to see funding allocated in the budget now for beginning this oversight process and delivering on the commitments the Council has made to the community. We recognize that doing this oversight right will take time, but there's no excuse for administrative delays, like requiring a separate budget action. Thank you. And transform Alameda looks forward to further collaboration with the city in future years on the budget adoption process. Take your next speaker. Lauren Lyon, co-owner Shalem. Good evening. Speaker like Salem. Evening, everyone. First I want to say thank you too much to the city staff for their work on this budget. The first year I really dug into it. And I was just struck by how much work and nuance goes into it. So round of applause for all of you for working on it so hard. I did want to echo the previous speakers comments regarding the lack of funding in this budget process and Police Accountability Board and the temporary oversight that would come out of the city manager's office and far more formal oversight body bodies established. As we know, these were recommended by the steering committee and approved by this council. Funding for this should be in this budget, not require council to have to vote against. So I would strongly urge you to amend this budget to include funding for those items as discussed by the previous speaker. Thank you so much for your time. Thank you. And our next speaker. Before we call our next speaker. We now have seven speakers. So the time to 2 minutes. Yeah. And our next speaker is Josh Guyer. Good evening, Speaker Guyer. Good evening. Good evening, Mayor. So I would like to echo the the calls by other members of Transform Alameda to fully fund the the the steering committee, the Police Reform Steering Committee recommendations. I just want to hearken back to when Marty Gonzalez was killed by Alameda police. We had identified before that, I believe, 42% of police funding that currently goes to things that police are not needed actually to respond to. And we've been waiting I've certainly been waiting to see where the movement's going to be on that number, going from going from where we are in terms of the funding for the police to where we want to be, which is getting the police out of the way of mental health responders and economic supports and housing supports for people when when there is no public safety risk in when there when there are other other issues happening that do not required response. So so that we can not have to repeat and have a repeat of what happened to Marty Gonzales and other people who don't need that kind of response. These efforts need to be fully funded, and we need to move we need to move faster so that, again, no one else can be can be hurt or killed by by people that we pay with our tax dollars. Thank you. Thank you. And our next speaker. Laura katrina. Good evening. Speaker Katrina. Good evening, Madam Mayor and Council. I am calling in with the results of the People's Budget Survey. Alameda Transform. Alameda decided to go out and survey the community to understand because the city's budget demonstrates our city's values. What indeed does our city value? And so we had an online survey with 158 responses with approximately 25% coming from the West End East and central Alameda and 12% from Bayfront. And we asked respondents if they'd prefer to increase, decrease or maintain the current level of service for 20 different kinds of care. Our kinds of city services in four major categories. And those categories were basic safety needs and safety net community care and well-being, public works and city administration and emergency response. And if we look at the overall sentiment, basic needs and safety net were at 75% and we calculated that number by subtracting the promoters, those who voted to increase service a lot or increase service a little from the detractors, those who voted to decrease service lot or decrease service a little. It was pretty interesting to see that emergency response was at 0%, and I wanted to call out that. That was including community crisis response responders with 83%. But that then equaled the votes to decrease services for the police, which was 65%, and fire department 17%. So that basically went to zero in terms of sentiment by area. The top five areas to increase and these are where we got more specific was community care crisis responders. 88% of responders agreed and increased a lot or a little. Ongoing mental health and wellness. 86% of respondents. Food security. 84% of respondents. Housing security and community medics. 82% of respondents and education and schools. And they were indicating they'd like the police. 80% of respondents fire department and city administration to be decreased. Thank you. Thank you. And our next speaker. Melody Montgomery. Good evening, Speaker Montgomery. I. Thank you all. I don't think I. Have like a statement to say. It's more like a it is a statement of confusion. I keep hearing you give direction to staff to do a thing. And then I keep seeing budgets come back without the thing that you asked for. And I'm not sure if that's because it's a it's a miscommunication between what you're asking for or it's just something that maybe staff doesn't want to happen. And it feels very frustrating to me to see this budget come up with none of the things that we've been working so hard for and so a hard on. I didn't see anything for unbundling services. I didn't see anything for any of the recommendations that your steering committee and the people that worked on on those to do so. I sit here watching and listening in confusion. I'm not sure what else the people can do. We've spoken. We showed up. We did the work. We keep showing up. We keep doing the work. We keep telling you what. We want to. See. And I'm not sure what it takes for that to happen at this point. So yeah, I think I just want to say, oh, that's interesting and confusing. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker. Deborah Mendoza. Good evening, Speaker Mendoza. Am I unmuted? Yes, you. Are. Okay. Good evening, dear Mayor and City Council members. How and what we spend money on in the city of Alameda shapes our well-being, quality of life and safety. COVID and the murder of George Floyd have assured the nation into a new era where communities everywhere are forced to reckon with racism and police violence sooner or later . Alameda is no different. Actually, we are very much the same. We have our own version of George Floyd and his name is Mario Gonzalez. While on the task force after reviewing calls for service and meeting with police in dispatch, we reported back to you that well over half of 911 calls are non-criminal in nature. And that at a. Minimum, we should immediately divert police calls that involve mental health, substance use or homelessness and have that. Responded to by. Community based mental health professionals. That's not the fire department. With over half of 911 calls non-criminal. We need not only a divestment from the police budget, but also a comprehensive audit of the Alameda Police Department and an examination on which positions could be civilian ized moved out of APD or a combination of the two. This is not in the budget. We should be decreasing the police budget, not increasing it, nor hiring to fill vacancies even before shifting services. Instead, we should be reducing the police budget. Yet the 2021 budget would increase the police budget again today as the pandemic begins to end. We all realize that things will never go back to the way things were before and nor should they. We are forced to reexamine what really keeps us safe. With this in mind, I ask Where in our budget is that divestment from law enforcement? Where is funding to continue the work of the Task Force on Policing and Racial Equity? I urge you to make these adjustments. Thank you. Our next speaker. Alexia rocha. Good evening, speaker our. Good evening, everyone. I'm calling in. I support the statement of Jackie Zipkin on behalf of transfer me to. And I'm also wanting to echo what Laura Katrina's statement was. All of these ideas and requests are not new ideas. They didn't magically come out of the Transform Alameda survey. They've been things that we've been discussing and commenting on for over a year now that the public has been working on. And I really hope City Council takes more immediate action and prioritizes accordingly instead of constantly talking about it or creating processes that pay lip service to it instead of action. Melody Montgomery's confusion feels very similar. I've been absent from the last few city council meetings due to life happenings, and yet I feel like it's more of the same. People are making demands. People want less money spent on police. People want less police. And we're still here debating where and how to spend this money instead of creating immediate change that could have immediate impact. While more conversations can still be had. I agree with all of the previous callers statements and hope that council is listening closely. And as Debra said, where is the divestment? Thank you for your time. Thank you. Our next speaker. Marilyn Rothman. Evening, Speaker Rothman. Hello. I am in agreement, of course, with all the previous speakers on this matter. Unbundling of police means shifting resources, i.e. money out of the police department to other services, especially mental health. In the same vein, I am opposed to the Felt and Trust Felt institute as it operates in conjunction with law enforcement, not separately. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker. Our next speaker is a telephone. Call her with a phone number ending in 2 to 5. Okay. Just need to press star nine to unmute. Hi there. My name is Heinrich Alberts. I would like to urge that we include funding in the current year to develop the master plan for D Paved Park. I think this is a really important issue for our city. It's very forward looking and a very proactive approach to trying to deal with climate change, associated sea level rise. And I think that this will be an important investment for the city in that having a solid plan and getting us closer to actually doing the necessary work means we'll be in a far better position to apply for other kinds of funding for this project. I think the $250,000 that's been discussed, well, of course, that's significant money that it will really be, well, money well-spent and be very useful and productive and protective for our city going forward. Thank you very much. Thank you. And our next speaker. Vinny Camarillo. Good evening. Speaker Camarillo. Are you able to? There you go. You're married. Hi. Good evening, Madam Marian Council. As a former member of the Unbundling Services Subcommittee, I'm upset, as a lot of other committee members are, that none of our countless hours of work has been reflected inside of this budget. I wanted to echo a lot of what Melody had said. It's upsetting to see that we have worked hours and hours since September towards March on these recommendations for this year's budget, but nothing has changed or has been reflected. Why are you all continuing to find policing when the community has specifically demanded that mental health resources, social services, etc. has not been funded extensively in this budget? It's just upset, upsetting to see that policing has gone up instead of has gone down since we've requested that. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Gordon. Good evening, Speaker Gordon. Hi. Can you hear me? Yes, just fine. Hi. I am a homeowner. I'm a mother and an educator living here in Alameda. And I'm calling because I'm also feeling really disappointed and confused about what is going on. Last summer was really clear that we needed to make some really dramatic changes to our city to ensure the safety and well-being of all of us. And in March, you guys approved a whole bunch of things to move forward to to really get us there. And this budget just is so minimal in terms of what it actually says we're going to do. It doesn't convey a seriousness about this. And it's really frustrating. And I I'm frustrated that these are the only two that the only two options that the city manager office has come up with are the Felton Institute and the fire department. I'm frustrated that a number of us have offered to support the city manager's office in researching and connecting with other options and helping to figure this out. And we have been really largely ignored. We have not been invited into the process into any kind of a real way to make some things happen. So it's frustrating to see these two options as the only things. Given that these are the only two options that you guys are being offered, I definitely think we should go with the Bellevue Institute at this point because of the police involvement. Speaker Gordon, I hate to ever interrupt the speaker. Right now we're talking about the budget item. There is a later item where you could speak again on those choices that you're referring to. Okay. What I'm saying, though, is about the budget right at the beginning. What this budget represents are not the real options that we need to see. And it's really frustrating. And I look forward to better from all of you. And thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker. Jennifer Rakowski. Good evening, Speaker Rakowski. Hi. Thank you. I hope my internet holds out. Um, I wanted to say. There. Is a lot of momentum for change and this budget for sure. There are some hints at movement, but it feels like it's all around the edges. And as someone who was looking at the budget at the exact same time, I'm wrapping up being on the police task force and a family member of mine is a victim of a crime. It was really clear to me what keeps us safe and what doesn't keep us safe. And three police cars did not. Increase the safety of my daughter. A firetruck did. Not improve the medical care provided to her being. Billed. For a911 call for an assault in a city park did not feel like comfort and support from the community I live in. So both on the where we invest our dollars and also how we collect our dollars, there is deeper work to be done. Please look deeper at the work of the task forces. And. The work the community is recommending, and I will close with that. Thank you. Our next speaker is Abby. Good evening. Speaker Abby. Good evening, Madam Mayor and members of the City Council. I am speaking on behalf of Community Action for Sustainable Alameda and though we are supporting the inclusion in the capital improvement budget of $250,000 for the DE Pave Park Master Plan, Deep Park is has been envisioned to be a wetlands education park and demonstration site for educating the entire Bay Area about the impacts of sea level rise and the accommodations for welcoming the water. It really will be a jewel of the city. It's some it's it's planned to be a part of a continuation of the parks around the seaplane lagoon, some of which will be developed when the surrounding lands are redeveloped by and paid for by developers. We have a unique opportunity with this park to receive funding from the San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority, and the City Council did approve the application for a grant last year that was denied. And part of the reason it was denied is because there was no city funding, no skin in the game to demonstrate the city's participation in the park. We are really recommending that you allocate some funding to $50,000, $100,000 to the beginning of the master plan to demonstrate to the San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority that this project has city support. I've also been invited and we have course enthusiastically supporting the community outreach project to be initiated over the summer to invite the surrounding neighborhoods on the West End and in Alameda point to have a tour of the sites and to understand better what the options are and to support and to provide a guidance for the plan moving forward. This would be preliminary prior to the master plan, so we were really supporting that process. But we encourage the City Council now to allocate funding for the future application, which will be coming back to you this fall in order to submit to this RFP restoration authority. Thank you. And our next. Speaker, Aaron Frazier. Good afternoon. Good evening. Speaker Frazier. I want to. I wish I could just. Plus one, what Mellody Montgomery said. I agree with everything she said with with a couple of caveats that I also want to thank folks from the city manager's office who took part in meetings to educate some of us on the budget process. And I guess want to take away one thing from that meeting, which was so helpful and informative. And that is a lot of the budget is basically the same as last year. Right. That's sort of how the budgeting process works. You start with last year, you make a few changes and then you have this year. And I think certainly in 2020, a lot was different, but there weren't too many changes. There were some direction that attempted to make some changes, but some of those were overridden later. So I think now we have two years hence from 2019, and I think it's not the same as last year and you should make some real change. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker. That was our last speaker. Okay. Then with that, I'm going to close public comment, but I'm going to ask our city manager, Eric Leavitt, to just address some of the concerns that were raised about what this budget does and doesn't do where some other funding may lie. I will emphasize that this is a public comment. It is not Q&A. But when I hear so many of the same questions coming up over and over, I feel a responsibility to make sure the public has a thorough understanding. So, Mr. Leavitt, if I could ask you to just clarify some things for us. Mayor says the Ashcraft and City Council I can clarify that and I'll I'll start off and and say what we have done and what has been worked on through the study sessions. And then also, Jennifer, Andy and Jerry are here to add if they if I missed something. We have combined between two funding sources, about 1.3 million that we have added to the police or to alternate police, in particular for mental health, the police audit function. So things that were recommended by the committees, we've put in about 1.3 million, not specifically to those, but so that you had that access to money as we moved these reforms forward. In addition, we do have budgeted the crime analysts in the in the budget, and I believe we also have added more money for homeless programs in the in the committee development budget. In addition, you will have access as we move these reforms forward, as you talk further at a future agenda item. You have access to ARPA if there are ARPA eligible. And also we do have contingency funds that we can always come back and reallocate those contingency funds into further. If as we move forward, if the council wants to and any savings that would be accrued in the police department could also be be allocated that direction. Thank you, Mr. Levitt. And when you reference ARPA, that's the American Recovery Plan Act funding, that 29 million or so is coming our way into allocations over the next two years of this year and the next year. Thank you for that. Okay. We have completed I have a come in and thank you, Mr. Levitt. So let's go to the council now. I see Vice Mayor Valley's hand up. They just want to make I think it's important to kind of clarify and very plain speak for folks who are not familiar with the budgeting process. What the city manager just said without using acronyms or anything else, which is to just say that even if there are items that are not included in this budget, the Council can always add or change amend expenditures as we see fit. And there are in fact later budget items, later items that would potentially include directions to use city funds from various funding streams to fund some of the things that that our public commenters were requesting. So I just I think it's really important that we kind of address that question directly, which is one we can always amend our budget to. We can always add expenditures. And three, there are later agenda items tonight that do address some of the concerns that were raised. So I do want to just make it very clear for that. I do hope that the folks that were commenting will look at our agenda and perhaps participate in that later conversation. I did have a question on relative. There were some some requests relative to park. I know that we had talked earlier about the additional allocation to our rec and park funds potentially. Is that part of the conversation, too, to utilize some of those funds relative to that request? And who's in a position to answer that? We don't have Mr. Wooldridge on the call in the meeting. She's available. But if you're prepared, Mr. let it go. I was going to say the 200,000 could be as well as I believe Michael Wooldridge also was looking at combining with grant funds and looking at that and as I'm speaking, she is actually appearing. It's great. Like magic. I love it when that happens. Welcome, Ms. WOOLDRIDGE. Thank you, Mayor. Good evening, Mayor and Council. The intention for the 200,000 each year in the previous Council budget discussion was for the Recreation Parks Commission and my staff to determine current facility recreation facility needs that were requested by the community. And we had at present I had presented a list that included things like pickleball, tennis, skate park, BMX, bocce, those types of facilities. So while I strongly support the park, that was not the current intention. But that certainly is something that council could direct or that that we could we could discuss the Recreation Park Commission level. The reason that wasn't in the original list is because. The the facilities that are on the list are ones that are really near difficult to get funds for other than the general fund. There aren't grants to resurface a tennis court, for example, but do Pave Park. There is a grant that we will be that we applied for last year. We didn't get it. We got really good feedback. We intend to apply again this year. So I felt that that was something we could fund through grant funding. It certainly would help our grant application this year if we show that the city has essentially some skin in the game and has put some funds toward the project, even though it's not required, it always makes the grant application more competitive. But we wouldn't have the master fund done prior to that grant application October regard, even if it were funded right now. If I can just follow up on your comment and I see Councilmember De so you're next when you talk about it would be helpful to show that the city has some skin in the game when you go forward. Another time for a grant, some grant funding for Dave Park. How much skin are we talking about? Does it need to be six figures because well, I have a whole bunch of other concerns. But what's your sense of that? You've done a masterful job of bringing grant funding to our city over the years you've been here. Thank you. I appreciate that. That's a really hard question to answer. Whether it needs to be six figures. It certainly helps whether it needs to be 250,000. It may not need to be that much, but even a smaller amount, I think 50 to 100000 could could certainly help. But I don't I'm sort of throwing numbers out, honestly. I don't have a strong sense because the grant does not require any type of funding match. But but they do they have expressed that they appreciate it, showing they want to see that the city has some kind of commitment to the project. Okay. Thank you, Kalahari Desert. Well, thank you. I'm basically going to say the same thing that I said. I believe that on May 20th, at the end of the budget workshop then and you know, like many budgets, whether it's the operational or the capital side, you know, there are things that that that you dislike and dislike very much. But then there are also things that you like and and that, you know, you had a had an influence in in kind of shaping. And so looking at this budget from that angle, I still believe that this is a budget that I can live with. I do appreciate, for example, the discussion that we had with regard to the recreational facilities, the $200,000 a year for the next two years. And I do now remember, yes, indeed, that the direction was, you know, to have those recreational entities, you know, who are who have who have organized themselves and are very active and whose needs for for improved recreational facilities are immediate. So, so and so it's you know, we for that reason, we've increased, you know, the cap amount for the recreational facilities by $200,000. It's not guaranteed that'll go to tennis courts. It's not guaranteed that'll go to Pickleball or to BMX. But but you know, it's an opportunity for them to work with our Parks Commission to to make their case. And I would encourage to go for us to continue to go in that route, because I hear the need for a paved park. But my sense is that that's more of kind of a study, a master planning, whereas this is for for real immediate needs. So and I would love to work with my counsel, my colleagues to figure out different ways to to to fund and pays park to come up with the money that can assist Park Director Woolridge in going after grant funding for that. But, but, but I hope that we, we, we stick to the much what we had discussed very much and on May 20th, a workshop. I mean, there are things, you know, that I don't like in here and I've expressed a dislike over the years. But but I think it's not just the not just the recreation facilities increase, but but I also like. The fact that we're. Setting aside money for, you know, not to to to implement an alternative way of doing policing. So we're, you know, following through on the on the issues that were raised by the committee members. So maybe not, you know, to the to to the 10th degree that that that some would like. But but in significant ways though so this is definitely a budget that I can live with and I will continue to support it. Thank you, Counselor de SAC Vice Mayor Vella. So what I would like to do is actually make a motion to approve the budget. And with with a little bit of extra clarity and direction, I do understand and I think it's really important that we have a community led process relative to our parks. And my understanding is that Director Aldridge and Rec and Park is really trying to facilitate that conversation with CASA and APEC and the residents that are near to pave. And so provided that that process yield some sort of forward movement, that that goes through the process with rec and park and African Park wants to add or utilize that, that $200,000 that we moved over to the city relative to pay based off of those community led conversations. I'd be fine with that. So so that's just to add a little clarity to that. I think the overall intention of the Council, which is to help Director Aldridge best utilize the city funds. For a recognized career goal. Let me let me do this. If I could ask you to make the motion because I have lost where the motion might have started and stopped and where your comments help us with the motion you're making, and then you'll get a second and then we'll do discussion. Can we do that? Because one of my my resolutions going forward is that we try to be really clear in the motions we're making. And I, I want to make sure I get this gentleman notes, so let's go on top. Okay. So I'm going to make a motion to make I guess I can read it off of the agenda item. Approve and adopt the operating and capital budget for fiscal years 2021 and 20 to 20 2021 to 22 and 2022 to 23 and approving and adopt. Do we need to make do I need to make them all separately or. I love. The budget. Yeah, the budget and the workforce change and the workforce changes. City Attorney which. And Madam Chair and Madam Vice Mayor. One single motion could do if that is your intention. So I want to move approval after all three of the budgets that are listed. Perfect. We have a motion by Vice Mayor Vela. I see Councilmember Knox White's hand go up. Would that be the second? We have a second by Councilmember Knox. Right. Let's have discussion. Vice Mayor, why don't you lead the discussion? Just I think that as to to clarify, that director will work with the rec and park process, understanding that there's already underway an effort to involve and have a community led conversation around park and that potentially the additional allocation to the city could be utilized to move forward. DP Park If if that is in line with the recommendations and process through rec and. Parks. Overall master. I think it's was it the master plan list for our parks? Miss World is, in fact. That's correct. In your head? Yes. Okay. All right. Thank you. Anything further in your comments, Kels? However, I mean, Vice Maravilla. I just look forward to the later conversations in this meeting. Definitely. Okay. Other comments? I have a question and a comment. You go first. Councilor Harris. Spence, raise your hand up. I'm sorry. I'm happy to wait. No, go ahead. I am waiting for you. Sorry. I'm sorry. I didn't have any questions with this man's comment, so I. Didn't have any questions or comments on this item. Okay. All right. I guess I didn't want to respond to the vice. May sound like you had wanted to. I had want to just make my general comments. No, this is the time. We've had emotions. So now we're going to have our discussion. Then we're going to take the vote. So please. All right. So thank you. And I first of all, I want to thank the staff for all their efforts on this item. I think it's very important to acknowledge that at all. This is a very heavy lift and it's extremely comprehensive. Secondly, I want to thank the community for all of their input. And I also want to acknowledge that some some of the speakers this evening and I have received emails also that have concerns in regards to the budget that is being presented, but I believe will be adopted this evening. And if it truly reflects the community's values and the statements of the budget is reflective of the city's priorities, I do hear loud and clear. And I also want to thank my colleagues because there were many compromises on this budget throughout the process. So I think it's very important to acknowledge that. That being said, I will not be supporting the budget. I, I do not believe that there were. I'm not I'm not exactly. If you want to say on the same page, then I think coming out of or moving forward after having the pandemic the past 15 months, mental health is extremely important to fund. I would have liked to have seen AUC, Almeida, Unified School District and Almeida Family Services requests fully funded. I have advocated for more funding for recreation and parks. The data shows mental health as well as physical health being compromised in the past 12 to 15 months. And I fully expect that we will see more side effects moving forward. I do fully support the funding of the 250,000 for de pave part planning. I think that when our council and our community supports climate action, which I actually did not support the plan and this goes to actually some of my concerns. We spend a lot of money and time on plans and then things like this that I, I think are a big part of the plan are left behind and and have it come out of the park budget. I don't think there are sufficient funds there. I also have concerns with which I don't even recall being discussed. The firefighter safer grants positions transitioning to the general fund and that was it is discussed in the correspondence from the city manager is an attachment and if you go to the bottom of I believe it's page three. And maybe. Four, but it shows that for fiscal year 21, 22, 532,000 is coming out of general fund to pay for those firefighters. And then 20 in the fiscal year, 22, 23 is 1,792,000. And I think as much as we're looking at how to improve policing, I think we have to also consider analysis of the firefighters just to make sure that that is money well spent. If you look at also in that letter shows clearly that the reserves are being depleted. And there's actually a really nice chart in that letter, which I believe it's exhibit one to this item, but it speaks to. Okay. We're going to drop below, but we try to do 25% operating reserve at the end to have that. Starting. I guess it's by the time 20 to 23 and then at the end of the five years, 24, 25, we're at 12% of projected expenditures and you'll see the contributions to the unpaid pension liabilities. I believe it's 10 million, 5 million, 3 million. But I really think we need to spend more time looking at that. I think since we are what I calls sweeping funds annually, we take that percentage of what's left in the reserves after we do the budget, and then we use that to pay down the unfunded pension liabilities . That is a significant chunk of money. And I personally think we should actually. And that money goes to employees and then there are their benefits. So as as was already shared a large part of the budget is for employees and then their pensions and unfunded pensions and unfunded pension liabilities. But at the end, I think that if we are in fact going to deficit spend, that is appropriate to deficit spend for mental health and physical health and recreation and parks. I think it all goes together. I would have liked to see a lot more money allocated to that. And then also, of course, the Deep Park, I think that's something that I actually do think at some point my colleagues will come up with a way to fund that because I think it is a priority. But I do think that's one of those things sooner rather than later because and we had some great speakers this evening and we received a lot of emails on this. If you if we really are serious about climate action and then also working with the veterans as they spring in their clinic, then I think it is appropriate to fund that at this time. And and I also want to commend our director of Record Park, Amy Walters, that I see here, because she has, in fact, applied for the grant before. Sadly, it was denied. Grants are extremely competitive and. I think that it is critical that I actually do not expect the grant to be and of the San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority. I do not expect it to be successful until the city does, in fact, put some money in and maybe it's 50,000 or 100,000 if we're not going to do the 250,000, I don't actually know where the 50,000 a dollar figure came from. But I do think that the and also I would have liked to see in scholarships to participate and an increase in scholarships to participate in the recreation and parks activities. And I know we have some I'm going to submit that there is much greater demand this year. And so I think that and when you look at the budget, you can see we're using up the reserves. So at the end, I was suggesting, you know, we've gone through the process of this is what fully what I expect the budget to be. But I do think that when we are deficit spending anyway, that it is appropriate to spend it on community members, which also includes library the services when you call the ambulance, if that has to be paid somewhere. I actually and I want to thank the speaker that spoke to we have a victim of a crime. You have nine loved one called and then you have an ambulance, of course, and then you have the victim receive a bill for the ambulance. And I understand that that can actually be thousands of dollars. And I had another had a mother reach out to me and say that a similar thing had happened and that it was their son that they had called because of a threat of suicide. And again, they received this bill. And so things that we can look at to improve our expenditures. I appreciate everyone's comments and thank you very much. Thank you. Councilmember Herrera. Spencer let's see. Councilman asks, why did you want it? And I just want. To give you my thanks to staff, I think did a great job of coalescing everything into a budget that we agreed upon last month. I'm ready to call the question, but I know you probably have some comments, so I will. Okay. Listen, called the question takes a whole other motion second. I know we're not going to do that. No, my my honor, pretty brief. I want to just clarify a couple of things that. So maybe City Manager Levitt, you can help me. I was under the impression that we did fully fund the request from HST and from Allenby to family services for mental health services. Can you help us understand those items? I might need help. I think it's 125,000 that we funded for that. Is that correct? That's correct. Yeah. Oh, Michel. Yeah, and that was it. My recollection was that's what we were asked to fund. I'd have to go back to our Gary, my assistant city manager. My father. Your car? Yeah. So they the. The PTA and the school district representatives have raised $75,000. They needed $25,000 to top up a position that'll be in the school system. The second are the remaining $100,000. This fiscal year will be used to support both the this I'll call I'll call it school but it's also school and family. They have a program that will help not just survey us but other other students across the community, plus family needs. And so the idea that there be two people in that position, what we've learned since the last budget workshop is that AFS may be back. The the PTA contribution is not necessarily in place for the second year. And so whether that school district funded or PTA funded or city funding is still a question. But we have set aside $125,000 in both years for mental health related items. And I would I would say that there'll be more to come for a year or two on that topic. Thank you, Mr. Bowden. And this is something that I have been skimming the report and trying to find it, and maybe it was in my imagination, but I thought I saw a table and this would have come in your community development department. And in one fiscal year we had funding for Village of Love, but not in the second year. There was the first year, but not the second or the second, but not the first. But is it does anyone recognize that item? And my question was simply why would we not be funding Village of Love over two years? But as I as I sit here today and this too, if you happen to know where that might live, or maybe I just feel like I made a note somewhere, but I'm not finding it impacted. It's sorry, mayor. This note, please help me. This is in the mental this is in the police reform staff report. One of the I know is there's a two column there and. I believe. There's just funding sources coming from a number of different areas. Okay. You know what? Mr. Burton, thank you so much. I'm not losing my mind, at least not at the rate I thought I might be. But when we come to that item, I'll ask my question. I knew I had had, you know, flagged it in my notes, but I got it. Yes, there's more budget discussion to come. So then the only other thing I would say, and I agree with three of my former colleagues and then certainly some of what Councilmember Harry Spencer said, that when it comes to whatever funding is or isn't allocated to Dave Park, I just want to say that I very much respect and want to honor and give space for the work of our boards and commissions. They do important work on our behalf. They, they bring items to us, I mean, but based on city council priorities and direction and whatnot. So I have complete faith in Mr. Aldridge and the Recreation Parks Commission, which she staffs, to bring us the information we need. If she feels that she needs Ms.. Aldridge feels she needs some additional funding to really amp up that grant funding. Like I said, she's she's really a master of grant funding applications, successful grant funding applications. She'll let us know and we can we can take action then. But anyway, I am very satisfied with this budget and I'm ready for a vote. Except I see Councilmember Sykes hand up there. Oh, well, thank you. You know, I'm still going to hold to my comments in terms of the way that I framed my view of this thing, even while I would want the $200,000 per year over the next two years dedicated to hard or active recreational uses, improving active amenities or infrastructure for active recreational uses such as Pickleball or BMX or those roller skate people or tennis court resurfacing. You know, I think I think like I said, you know, you have to look at the bigger picture. The bigger picture is that we weren't getting the $200,000 per year for over the next two years prior to this decision. I do think that to taking some of that money to use it to to as kind of leverage to to match as matching funds for grants, it will, you know, lessen the amount available for active recreational users, improving those infrastructure. But like I said, it's a it's a compromise that I can live with. And, you know, it'll just be it'll behoove the stakeholders. Whether they're pickleball people or BMX people or tennis court people, you know, to continue to make their case as well as the stakeholders on behalf of the park. So I'm still going to support this this budget, but I do I think a point raised by Councilmember Herrera is worth repeating because, you know, several years ago, points were made that, you know, when the safer grant funds for fire departments is exhausted, well, that's you know, that's going to end the project. But the reality, though, is the Safer grants is being exhausted, but we are now backfilling it with general fund money. And that's, you know, one potentially $1.7 million out of general fund money. But, you know, these are the type of difficult decisions that we have to make. I still think that on balance, that we're moving in the right direction, but we've got some larger issues to deal with. For example, that and for those who are fresh to this, you probably won't know this issue. But we still have larger issues to deal with, like how to revamp hopefully the pension, the additional pension set aside so that we do buy out the reserve. So we do need to look at that policy. But like I said, you know, on balance, I could support this. I think there's more good in it than and challenges. And I'll leave it at that. Thank you. Thanks. Councilmember Garza, Madam Clerk, may we have a roll call vote, please. Councilmember de Stark. Yes. Herrera. Spencer. No. Knox Fike. High Avella. I may. Or as Ashcroft. I might carry a 4 to 1. Thank you, Madam Clerk. All right. With that, we close. We actually adjourned this special city council meeting of the city council and successor agency to the Community Improvement Commission. And excuse. Me, we move on to the regular agenda item. May we have roll call please? ROCCA Husband noted five present. And also there were at 1.102 attendees on the zoom and it's down to 99 now. Oh. Mayor, we can't hear you. Your mike is all right. Sorry. Thank you for remembering to do the count for us. Okay, so Raqqa has been noted. And then. Do we have any agenda changes? I think so. Councilmember Harry Spencer, were you raising your hand? As you know, I do have. A question in regards to pulling items, wanting to speak on them and not just voting no. Is that on the consent calendar? Yes. Sure. But you're not you're not suggesting that we change the order of the agenda, right? Yeah. Okay. We will hear you when we get to a consent calendar momentarily. Well, maybe a few more minutes from now. All right. So then we move on to item three, which is proclamations, special orders of the day and announcements. And we do have a proclamation declaring this month, June 2021, as Elder Abuse Awareness Month, and you'll find that online on the city's website.

A MOTION requesting the executive provide an assessment report that makes recommendations on roles and responsibilities of the county and the King County Regional Homelessness Authority in responding to the regional homelessness crisis, and a motion accepting the assessment report.

KingCountyCC_09152021_2021-0289

I want to thank the applicants for the conversation and the interviews today and would I'm expect to now see you on Tuesday in full council. And with that, we will advance our agenda to motion 2021 to 98 and request that the executive provide an assessment report that makes recommendations on roles and responsibilities of the county, city of Seattle and the King County Regional Homelessness Authority and other cities in King County responding to the regional homelessness crisis. We had a briefing on this at our last meeting, so I invite April Sanders from council staff to give a brief overview of the legislation and then brief the amendments. I'm Sanders. You have. Good morning, April. Standards Council Policy Staff. The material for item six began on page 17 of your packet. Since I brief this item two weeks ago, I'll bypass that background and dove into itself. But the proposed motion would request the executive transmit an assessment report to the county on or before March 31st of next year , as well as an accompanying motion that provides a vision for and makes recommendations on roles and responsibilities of various jurisdictions in responding to the homelessness crisis. Those jurisdictions that are listed in motion and cities include King County, the city of Seattle, the King County Region, Homelessness Authority, and cities represented by this entity association. The Assessment Report would provide these recommendations for the near term, their immediate term and the long term. Additionally, the report would do the following, but identify investment and funding for the Just Care program and describe how investment and programs will align with those administered by other entities. It would describe how the issues will coordinate on capital investments. Would identify which, if any, of the recommendations from challenge Seattle's Chronic Homelessness Across Crossroads report should be implemented, and it would describe which entity should take on which role and responsibility in those recommendations. The proposed motion states that the executive should consult with the City of Seattle, the Regional Homelessness Authority and the Sound City Association in the development of the report. That's the end of my brief interim, and I'm happy to dove right into amendments. If you like. Similar questions, I would invite you to proceed to amendments three. So Amendment one, which is on page 26 of your packet, would remove the city of Seattle and other cities in King County as entities for which the executive should recommend roles and responsibilities in responding to the homelessness crisis. It would also change the duty of the assessment report and accompanying motion from March 31st to June 30th of 2022. And there is also an accompanying title amendment. If this amendment carries. Thank you. Questions of Ms.. Sanders. Could you help me understand why they should be excluded as part of what we evaluate? Sure if it's a reason of why I would defer to the sponsor. But it would leave the County and Regional Homelessness Authority as the entities for which the executive should provide recommendations. But I'll defer to the sponsor as to the rationale. Mr. Chair. Please. Thank you. And April, thanks for your great work on this council member. Lambert In answer to your question, in working with the executive on the scope of the work they suggested and it made sense to me that we are doing a report here, probably should try and figure out or tell them the other jurisdictions what they were or should be doing. And that made some sense that we should focus on our our role at the county. And so we worked with DHS and the executive on the amendments. And I'm authorized to say that they are supportive of them and the underlying motion as amended. And Councilmember de Bhaskar. We'd like to make a motion. Sure. Thanks, Mr. Chair. I appreciate members consideration of this. As I said before, it's not a big policy motion. It's just asking for a report and check in and working with the executive if they thought it would be helpful as we transition this big job over to the regional almost, but still understanding that we as a government are going to play an important role, like through our health, through housing initiative, our behavioral health services, our hoteling programs, etc.. And the notion here is to kind of see after two and a half years or so, kind of where we stand and help us give us some visibility on where we're going. So with that background, I would just respectfully request colleagues support and move adoption of the Motion and Amendment One. We have the motion 2020 129 before us with Amendment One before us. Discussion on Amendment One. All those in favor of Amendment One, please signify by saying I by those opposed. Nay, the ayes have it. The amendment is adopted. Discussion on the motion is amended. I apologize, Mr. Chair, there is also a title amendment t one on page 28 of your packet, which just removes those entities from the title. Councilmember Dombroski the title amendment t one is before us. So you know our debate on the title amendment. All those in favor please signify by saying i. I opposed nay. The title amendment is adopted. The motion as amended is before us. I see no further discussion. All those. Madam Clerk, would you please call the roll? Thank you, Mr. Chair. Councilmember Banducci. Councilmember Dombrowski. Council member. Done by. Councilmember was I. Councilmember member. Councilmember Article. I. Councilmember one right there. I was a member by. I thought. I. Council members online. Are. Mr. Chair. Hi. Mr. Chair. The bonus nine eyes are on us. Thank you. By your vote, we have given a do pass recommendation to motion 2021 to 8289 as amended, and we'll send it to council in regular course of business. And I'm concerned. Rather close of business on consent. And that takes us to item seven, a briefing on the best search for kids implementation plan, which has been duly

A bill for an ordinance vacating a portion of right-of-way near 1750 15th Street, with reservations. Vacates a portion of the public right-of-way on the southeasterly corner of Wewatta Street at 15th Street, with reservations, at 1750 15th Street in Council District 9. The Committee approved filing this bill by consent on 12-13-16.

DenverCityCouncil_01172017_16-1274

At when you all have those costs more the the build out. And I know the building has capacity to maybe grow in phases. So as you know what those costs are, if you wouldn't mind sharing them, that would be much, I'm sure. Absolutely. Thank you. All right, counsel. Madam Secretary, please pull up 1274. You beat me to it. Thank you. You have a comment for Council 1274. Go ahead, Councilwoman. If I have this. Particular location correctly. We received a lot of communication from people regarding this vacation. For an alley in the lower downtown area, which is the southeast corner of Oui Water in 15th Street. And I, I don't know if this came to committee says it was filed on consent, but this raised a concern with the folks in lower downtown about closing off an alley access that would create kind of a dead end for the concern was especially expressed for women who, you know, enter and exit their buildings and would have to access it off the alley. And so, I don't know. Councilwoman Brooks, this is your district? Yes, this is my district. This is the find district nine. You know, at this particular I think you're getting it confused. There won't be any cutting off from the right of way. This was done for the development in this district, but it will not be taking any right away from the public. We had a quick conversation over this last last week. Okay. So their access is not being restricted and none of the alley is being blocked. They'll have full through access of the alley. Yes, I believe they will. And in do we have a representative Chris. Mr. Sheers, come on up here the great architect in Denver. I'm Chris. Here's 1550 when you've. So can you tell us about. Yeah. Tell us about the proposal in front of us. This is an Ali vacation here. Will it be cut off? They're asking will their access be cut off to the river here? No, no, no, no. This just this is dealing with a sidewalk area. And it has to do with a setback for the building. This proposed by Randy Nickels at the intersection of 15th and Maulana. I think that council woman I'll tell you the the issue that she brought up is a separate project and your concerns are legitimate for that. Okay. Thank you. I was confusing this with that other project and thank.

Recommendation to request the following recommendations of the Illegal Explosives and Fireworks Action Plan to address the illegal use of fireworks and explosives in Long Beach: 1) Request City Attorney to draft an ordinance that would include a person who owns, rents, leases or otherwise has possession of a premises as a responsible party for the illegal use, discharge, possession, storage or sale of fireworks on the premises; 2) Request City Attorney and City Manager to report back to the City Council with options for increasing the penalties for anyone cited or arrested for fireworks violations; 3) Request City Attorney and City Manager to report back to the City Council on the feasibility of including an administrative citation process for illegal fireworks use, to allow for additional enforcement capability in Long Beach; 4) Request City Manager to assess the feasibility of establishing an online portal or GoLongBeach app feature for residents to submit video evidence of fireworks violations for referral to the City Prosecutor; 5) Request City Man

LongBeachCC_06232020_20-0603

Thank you. Item 25, which is also fireworks related. Communication from Councilman Austin, Councilwoman Zendejas, Vice Mayor Andrews, Councilmember Richardson. Recommendation to request recommendations of the illegal explosives and Fireworks Action Plan to address the illegal use of fireworks and explosives in Long Beach. Councilman Austin. Sir. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I'd just like to just just frame the issue. While the illegal use of fireworks is a recurrent issue, each year, this year it's been mentioned, seems to be significantly amplified and based on media reports that the surge in illegal fireworks and explosions complaints is being experienced not only here in Long Beach , but in cities across the country. The activity seemed to have started much earlier this year with greater frequency and a greater number of loud explosive devices nightly. And like many of my colleagues on the council, I not only experience these nightly disruptions in my neighborhood. I've spoken with many residents and heard from many residents in my district and throughout the city that they are. Asking the city to do more to address the problem. I'd like to thank my colleagues, council members and they House Vice Mayor Andrews and Councilmember Richardson for signing on to this item really at the last minute. This was a supplemental item as well as Councilmember Price and the council members who brought this item, previous item to the agenda on fireworks. It deserves our attention as a council. This is an issue that impacts many of us, all of us, especially those who are veterans or others who suffer from PTSD. Families with small children, pets, pet owners. I've heard from many of you, but it affects us all. And there's no easy answers here. A week ago, I held a virtual town hall on the issue of. Legal fireworks with our city prosecutor Doug Halbert, North Division Police Commander Anthony Lopez. We had a very productive discussion and I received many constructive suggestions, suggestions from the community, and I've taken a look at some of them as well as best practices in other cities. With that information, we put together this a legal explosives fireworks action plan to support our education campaign and current enforcement efforts with additional tools to curtail the activity. Is that versus the virtual town hall and bringing this item forward. Our city prosecutor has already, as mentioned, established a public portal for residents to report and submit evidence of illegal firework activities directly to the city prosecutor's office and website of the city prosecutor. However, dot com backslash fireworks that are illegal is also started sending letters to property owners where illegal. And I want to clarify that property owners, residents, anybody who is a dweller in a household can be cited. And he's going to send these to these individuals where these these households, where where illegal fireworks are being charged and given notice the storage or discharge of fireworks. That property is against the law and constitutes a public notice. I would like to thank the city prosecutor, however, for taking these immediate steps. While we won't be able to eliminate the problem of illegal fireworks altogether and immediately with additional education and concrete actions, I believe we can take steps forward here to really make a difference for our city. So we put forth seven our request on this item, and I'm certainly open to hear from my colleagues about potential amendments to this. But number one, we request the city attorney to draft an ordinance that would include a person who owns rents, leases or otherwise, has possession of the premises as the responsible party for the illegal use, discharged possession, storage or sale of fireworks on the premises. Number two, we request the city attorney and city manager to report back to the city council with options for increasing the penalties for anyone cited or arrested for firework violations. Number three, we request the city attorney and city manager to report back to the City Council on the feasibility of including an administrative citation process for legal firework use to allow additional enforcement capacity in our city. Number four. Request the city manager to assess the feasibility of establishing an online portal or go Long Beach app feature for residents to submit video evidence of firework violations for referral to city prosecutor. Five request the city manager assess the feasibility of utilizing open data or crowdsourcing to create a publicly accessible heat map of incidents of illegal fireworks and explosives in Long Beach. Number six Request of City Manager Assess the feasibility of establishing a fireworks hotline for residents to report illegal fireworks and explosives. And lastly, number seven, request the city manager provide an update on public education efforts this year that all fireworks are illegal in Long Beach. I think some of this is done and is also in line with what we are already doing. But we want to send a strong message to anyone out there that that fireworks are illegal. I would appreciate my colleagues and support on this item. I know it's very important to all of our constituents. Thank you very much. My next councilwoman. Jeanine, you're up next. Somebody else can. Somebody that's on the item can second it. That's fine. I can go at the end. But I wasn't there. Right. Fine. Okay. Fine. This is I like to say, you know, in this one person I wouldn't appreciate out, you know, for bringing in the other, you know, our colleagues that got on with this excellent idea. And there's no doubt that in the last 75 years I've been here, this is the worst year for fireworks. You know, I like some questions before we get started here. You know, do we have a, you know, a report on the most commonly reported locations for fireworks? But. I'm sorry. Can you repeat the question, please? We have a report. What's the most common, you know, reported locations for fireworks. So we can ask our police department and our director of Disaster Preparedness Communications, Reggie Harrison, to give some anecdotal response to that. I think the item is asking us to kind of come back with a heat map where we would provide some data, but we can provide some just anecdotal evidence. I do believe we're seeing them throughout the city right now, but I'll turn it to them to ask or to give additional detail. The Vice Mayor being joined by chief of police Robert Luna. As the city manager mentioned, we are and as a report indicated, we have seen highs in calls for service regarding fireworks already exceeding what we received during the same time period last year. My most recent report indicates that we're up by 25% over the same period of time last year in terms of the number of calls for services that we're receiving. And they are they're being called from all over the city. We haven't found a concentrated area that I'm aware of at this point. It seems like they're pretty well distributed throughout many neighborhoods in Long Beach and also not just in Long Beach, but nationwide as well. We're seeing lots of reports as indicating that this issue is record setting across the country. So it's not just an isolated alarm beach issue. Uh, if I could add to that. Robert Luna here. Good evening, Vice Mayor and members of the City Council. We've heard our community loud and clear. I've spoken to many of you in the last week, two weeks. And I know that our community is very frustrated with this significant nuisance from the police department perspective. We are in the process of putting maps together, and they're for the purposes of giving them to our officers. So they're armed with that in the field and they can go out and identify specific addresses or locations where it's a continuous challenge for us. I saw one today where we had three addresses, specifically in one of the police divisions. And the officers are directed to go out there and spend more time. The last couple of weeks have been a little difficult. We've been preoccupied with we're now at 60 protest. So as those hopefully will slow down a bit, we can go out there. But for anyone in the public who's listening to me, please, it is a reminder that fireworks are illegal in this city. We want you to be respectful to your neighbors. I live here in the city and it's very difficult to sleep at night, as many people have described it. And I've got to tell you specifically in this environment, it's very difficult for our officers to go out and want to give citations for this violation. It is $1,000. We don't want to give citations, although we've given out several dozen of them already, and we don't want to give out any more. So we want you to stop doing this. But that being said, we are going to be putting out additional officers primarily focused on this activity. And if you're caught, you're going to get cited. And it's really expensive. So please stop. Thank you. I really am that cheap because I'm really looking forward to report coming back with locations and numbers of citations. You know better to use in don't know drama for you know the enforcement so but but what I really would like to thank you know residents can again who's keeping me on my toes every single boom she she may not know it but B she'd be in a lab right up she's right up the street from each other. And I am convinced that together we are going to find out who is keeping instead in all these so we can get these things taken care at night. So with that, I want to thank everyone. And so the next that will be missed is the data. You coming up, please. Thank you, Vice Mayor. ANDREWS First of all, I wanted to thank our staff for for giving this item the much needed attention that it's been a need for these past couple of weeks. I know that with COVID 19 present here, we haven't been able to give as much attention to this to this issue as we as we would have liked to. But, yes, I am I am a resident of the downtown area here in Long Beach, and I am am witness to every night having to hear the you know, the these fireworks are illegal and they're illegal for a reason. So I appreciate all my residents for trying to try to chime in and letting us know where the problem is and stuff. So they're all over our district. So I really appreciate Councilmember Austin for taking the lead on this on this problem that, you know, that we're all facing right now. It's very important that we you know. That we realize that this really affects those most vulnerable, which are our seniors, our children, and especially our pets. And it's very, very heartbreaking to feel like your your your hands are tied, because by the time that, you know, the officers come out to where the site was, there's nobody there anymore. So it's very hard to track and actually hard to enforce it, even though it is a misdemeanor here in Long Beach. So with that said, I'm so excited about the new portal that our prosecutor has launched today that will enable us to actually submit the videos, the the locations of where we're hearing them and pictures. But I just want to tell all our residents, not only in the first District but everywhere to yes, please do report those and any instances onto this portal, but always remember that your safety comes first. That's one of the things that I think is the most scary from these illegal fireworks, is that, you know, the innocent people that are not setting them off are are the ones that are being hurt by it. I've known people getting burnt in their back by them, you know, with them not even being close to someone, setting them off. So we and I, it's just so scary to see that and to put, you know, innocent people in harm's way . So, again, if if if you're out there, you're listening. Please don't don't do these fireworks. Please don't just think of those other people that you might hurt and you know, it's just not right. So thank you very much again, council member Austin for for bringing this item forward. Yes, Councilwoman Mungo. Councilwoman Mungo, are you there? Yes. Thank you, Vice Mayor. A couple of quick questions. We talked a little bit about the fee of $1,000 fine, but the individuals that we're talking about are literally buying thousands of dollars in fireworks. Lighting them on. Right. So there is a fine is very meaningful too. So my question would be to city staff, what can we do to force add to the. Along the lines of 40 hours of community service, you're keeping people up and ruining their sleep. Let's find something that's more important to you than money. If you're obviously willing to let your money on fire, what else can we do? So yes. So it's currently a misdemeanor. We've looked into this and whether or not we can raise the fee, I believe that would require some state law changes in terms of other sentences. That tends to be up to the city prosecutor on what he can sentence under. Perhaps a chief when I can expound on that. Currently, as Mr. Modica stated, Councilwoman Mango, it is a misdemeanor and the punishment or the fine can go up to $1,000. So you basically get a misdemeanor citation for $1,000. If the judge, when you go to court, if he keeps it at that, he or she keeps it at that amount. Is there an administrative fine that we could impose instead of 40 hours of community service? Because, again, fireworks are expensive. And if you're willing to light tons of fireworks on fire, you're literally lighting your money on fire. So to me, that saying $1,000, no, no big deal. So what other alternatives as a city could we pass legislation, either local legislation that says, okay, well, in Long Beach, it's an administrative fine and we're going to do 40 hours of community service. Or 60. I'm open to a lot of suggestions. Yeah, I hear your frustration and that's a level of frustration. A lot of us and I see us as a community. I will absolutely sit down with the city attorney and the city prosecutor to see what further options we may have. And then can you tell me about the Coordination Council member Richardson and I, when we're on Facebook and talking with community members, talk a lot about, um, we work with our own commanders, but we have some challenges on our borders from cities who are contract cities and may not be contracting for as much service or are patrolled by another agency. And specifically, I've worked 4th of July as a sheriff's deputy in the city of Carson, and I'm aware of what they're going through. But, um, for a city to get serious, no matter what city it is, they need to have adequate staffing. Because if they don't, all of the Long Beach residents who are in border cities are really just. Garage with the fireworks that are just adjacent to them because the sounds are so loud and the sound carries so clearly. What are we doing to cooperate with our partners at Signal Hill, Los Alamitos, SEAL Beach and the L.A. County Sheriff's Department, which covers Lakewood, Lakewood, Hawaiian Gardens, Bellflower and Paramount. One of the advantages we have here in the city, our own city, is that we have our own police department. So when a community speaks, all of you speak to me and speak to me very loud and clear. So we're able to put resources on this challenge. I'm just going to be brief and say that other cities around us, specifically county agencies, don't show the same level of interest that we do. Okay. You know, there was not. You have. And you've mentioned that the increases in calls is up 25%. Do you think that that is a total number of reported? Which would be great. Or is it location? Because one of the things I was invited to a Facebook group called Against the Fireworks. And I had originally thought it was going. Uh, Councilwoman Mango. The the dispatches or the calls for service are up. I know we could probably turn it into something like that. Can't remember. We lost two there for about 20 seconds, can you? Or are we getting more locations from your gut? So, Councilmember, we lost you for about 20 seconds. Can you repeat the question again, please? Councilmember Can you hear us? Councilmember Mongo. Fine. I think we lost it. We're going to go and come here. But you said the council vice mayor. Vice mayor. Okay. Go ahead. Mr. Harrison, were you able to tell me if it was 25% increase in locations or calls? Because what we need is a large number of residents participating in the crowd sourcing to identify and narrow down the locations to send in our officers. Councilwoman Mungo Robert Luna here again. The numbers that were given out, calls for service, an increase in calls for service that we are receiving both into dispatch and then obviously that our police officers are handling. In regards if I you did cut out there for a second, I think you asked if there were reports taken on something like this and know there are calls for service that we go back to and then our systems can draw from that calls for service for things like heat maps and addresses that our officers are paying more attention to, to try and stop the use of the illegal fireworks. I'm hoping that answers your question, but you did cut out there for a second, so I want to make sure I did answer your question. Thank you, Chief. I was working towards figuring out if we were to set aside a task force in every region of the city to crowdsource where the explosions are coming from, then maybe the police officers could be more successful. I know there's nothing more frustrating than to show up to a location based on a call report, but to find out that that's not the location. Fireworks they echo the sound can't always be identified depending on what region of the city or district of the city you're coming from. So I was just trying to figure out if we could work some kind of crowdsourcing. With our neighbors. And then lastly. There was a discussion two years ago about evidence and how a person needs to do a private person's arrest to enforce that. They saw the lighting of the firework versus a police officer seeing the lighting of the firework. Have we made any progress as a city or any with our legislation to allow the prosecution of. People lighting off fireworks that are caught on film. Let me try and answer that the best I can. Currently, it's a misdemeanor, and if the officer observes it, they can cite for the violation if they didn't see it. But one of our community members sees it. They can do a private citizen's arrest. And Councilmember, this is Tom. The program that the city prosecutor is launching is exactly that. So he is launching a website where residents can upload their videos and upload their pictures. They can put in suspect suspect descriptions, they can give actual locations and they can say, here is the criminal activity that I witnessed. And then the prosecutor will send letters to the property owner whose property it is, because that is against the law, not to create a nuisance on your property. And then that can be followed up on that will requires, you know, some identifying information. So the more information the community has to provide the prosecutor, the better on specific individuals that are performing specific criminal acts. So it is another tool that we're glad to have added to the arsenal. I appreciate that. Councilmember Odinga and I were talking earlier. I know in my district we have some individuals who are not necessarily associated with the House. So, for instance, a group of neighbors see the individual. Adjacent to the park, lighting off fireworks. But they've never seen him in the neighborhood before, so they're not sure which household he belongs to. What about the videoing of a particular person not associated with a residence? The backpack lighters, I guess, is what we're kind of calling them. Yeah. And those pictures or videos can be turned over through the city prosecutor to the police department, and we can investigate it to see if we can make a connection and be able to identify them. So that is absolutely a possibility. And, Mr. Halbert, it will be it'll be available for sharing with our adjacent cities and the district attorney's office. I will have to ask that question. I think he's using it for our specific, you know, what's in his jurisdiction to be able to send the letters to for those go to private property owners. So, you know, that is one of the things that council has to look at. Last time was holding the private property owner more responsible. We had investigated the admin site process, which can do that, but it also requires a lot of work and some additional costs. The prosecution prosecutor can do that under existing laws, and we'd be happy to talk to our neighboring cities if they'd like more information on that. Wonderful. Thank you. We have to get a better handle on this. I mean, every night everyone knows I have three dogs and a veteran and a 20 month old, 19 month old at home. And as I lay in bed, when she wakes up in the middle of the night with the mortars going off and for years the dogs have been terrorized. But nothing like this year. This year, and I've talked to some of our officers, they are working their hardest. It is just very, very difficult to get a handle on all of this with the resources. So we have to come up with better solutions. So thank you for all that you're doing and thank you for continuing to listen to the community. And a big thank you to Councilmember Austin for your listening session last week. I know a lot of our neighbors really appreciate that and the committee that Councilman Price put forward, because those are all avenues where we can brainstorm and come up with solutions. A lot of people say, well, what are other cities doing? And I haven't been able to find a city that does any of it better than us yet. But I'm still listening and willing to adopt any other creative ideas that come from any other cities. Thank you. Thank you. That, of course, when asked would you said. That Vice Mayor wanted to take a minute and chime in on this? I think the city council has every year taken this on. And, you know, I think Councilman Austin for for putting this platform for us to all sort of jump in and share our thoughts and ideas here every year it's been it's been bad. And every year it seems like it's gotten worse. Every year we have an agenda item or two about it. This year, it's clearly worse than ever or people are also paying attention to this moment. So I think it causes us to discuss the complexity of the problem and let people understand just how big this issue is. It's a problem across the L.A. region. There's 88 cities here in L.A. County, all with different rules. We're all piled up right next to each other. You're North Long Beach, reported by Paramount, Bellflower and Lakewood all have different degrees of of the problem and different laws around the problem. And when long because but we're all right next to each other. And so you can you can walk right across our border by safe and sane, so you can buy illegal fireworks online. So people are frustrated. Residents are frustrated, but they are organizing. And I applaud their organizing. Hamilton Association My district's been very, very vocal. Every every neighborhood North Long Beach deals with this every single night. I say this lot to them when they visit. A part of it is I just try to help them understand that, hey, I rest my head north Long Beach every night right there with you. I raised the last five, last five years, two newborns that have been disturbed all night. We have to do a lot to keep my dog from, like, tearing up, tearing at the house. And so so we get it. We're frustrated about it. I think the legal fireworks Facebook group has done some good organizing. I know that. I'm concerned with what I've heard about some of the non productive responses to this. More specifically, what I'm hearing about vigilante patrol groups, I want to just say that it's important that our residents have confidence that that we are being proactive on this issue. And we are letting folks know that, you know, this is not a moment for any sort of vigilante justice. So I wanted to strongly discourage what I've been seeing out there, the talks about vigilantism. I also want to want to say that, you know, I think that we can spend a lot of time talking about solutions and what we're going to do. But I think we need to do more to check in on the welfare of our most vulnerable residents. So so for example, I spoke with the VA U.S. vets just here recently about just just today and over the last few days about creating a space for veterans with PTSD in different areas of town, veterans who are going to have a difficult time allow them to come to a safe space where there's counseling, maybe music, if it stays open til 12 or 1:00, maybe there's maybe there's you know, there's pizza, there's music, there's counseling. Allow them to be in a safe space so they can receive some therapy and be in a really safe space around them. I would like to personally just offer Highland Park for this. And I want to also in Councilman, I would include this in the motion. I want to offer my one time District nine funds to help if this going out in park and I hope that others can. I know the V.A. has some of this already, but in North Beach, we don't have anything like this. So I want to I want to add up to $5,000 for my one time to help get a program like this going to help folks just have a safe space. And I want to just pause there. Tom, would you mind responding to that request? Sure. So thank you, Councilmember. So we'd be happy to take a look at that, especially if that's a service that an existing group already provides and if we're able to host it here in Long Beach. We would this year need to be checking it with the health order to make sure that it fits under that. Typically, gatherings are not prohibited or prohibited are not allowed. But counseling services, there are some exemptions for some specific treatment and counseling services. So if you want to add that to the motion, we'd be happy to look at what can be done either this year or in the future. Absolutely. And what and what I understand, it's it's it's exactly what you described, what we what we discussed. It's really about counseling and therapy. And, you know, we want to utilize that exemption to the to the order to handle that. We have a venue, social hall out in part. We have funding. So that's what I want to I want to see happen. And we're talking about maybe the week leading up to the 4th of July and maybe the week after, because we know it's going to get worse. And then it doesn't just stop it, you know, it begins to smooth out. So that's the week I'm really concerned. Those two weeks are what I'm really concerned about. So the other thing that I want to mention is that I know that we have a lot of focus on suppression, and I know that that's important. But I really want to have some questions about upstream. How are these things coming into our community? Chief, are you able to speak to, number one, how we know that the very, very loud devices, the very loud explosive devices that are coming to. You have an idea on the scale on how they're coming in and our capacity to limit that ability for them to come in. Yes, sir, Councilman. When we've made arrest in the past and we've made several arrests in the past, generally people are selling them. They're selling them on the Internet, and they're getting them from either the state of Arizona or the state of Nevada, and they're bringing them in in quantities. So that is extremely difficult to enforce. But that does it. That never stops us from from doing what we do. And so we're talking a lot about giving citations or seeing violations out in the street, which is important. But we're also going to be on a very aggressive campaign to try and stop a lot of this activity on the Internet. And I'll leave it at that. Right? Right. So so that said, I know that, you know, we can we can do these things, but really, it's it's difficult without having a clear front door on where these things are coming in the community. And given our past work in L.A. County of different regulatory framework, really the statewide solution. So I want to also add to this this motion a recommendation for the city to advocate for a statewide ban. I think a statewide ban would supersede so the county would be able to do with this rogue charter city. So the state would have to do this in order for us to have one consistent law across the region to allow us to enforce them in a more strategic way. And so I want to include that as well. I'll accept that as a friendly. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Yeah. I was going to keep going. I got I got maybe one more. And I also mentioned my support for the data and the heat map. You know, I said that publicly. We've talked about this. It's included in the item. I think it's about really being transparent regarding how massive this issue is. We also need to be transparent. Transparent in the way our city prioritized, prioritizes responses. What I hear from folks, again, is that they don't necessarily feel heard that the city is responding. So, so so my my my thought here is that. When we rollout, when we identify whatever data we have, we also should be able to look at some response data and how we prioritize it and maybe think about and think about maybe some strategies on response that sort of could be targeted and there may be some innovative ways to do it. But I really want to see the data of the calls and the relationship to the response. I'm supportive of the ideas that that that the prosecutor to hold property owners accountable. These are discussions we've talked about with with respect to if a liquor store has certain activities that happen there, motels have certain activities happening in there. The property owner also is accountable to the impact they have on the broader neighborhood. And if we know that there are certain properties that are, you know, a problem, then, you know, I think that's something we we certainly need to look at. I think that makes sense. On Monday, I'm going to the city prosecutor joining joining me on a District nine town hall. I think that would be a good time to say it. 530 on Monday, a virtual town hall. That information is coming out in email, but the city prosecutor is going to join us to talk about this concept as well. So a lot of these meetings are happening across the city. So I want the ninth district to know that theirs is coming up on Monday. I think that's all I have. And just to sort of account, thank you for accepting the friendly councilman. I want to just be clear cause I didn't hear a second I cued up, so I want to be on the record second in this as well. And and, Councilman, you accept that that part I want to add some of my one times to help get this pilot program on as well. You guys you guys get that as well, councilman. The one times. I mean, that's something that I think you can do independent of this this item and set that up in your district. I mean, no, I don't know that that has to be a part of a citywide thing. I mean, you want to do it at Highland Park. You want to use your district nine one times. You know, I'm not sure because I don't want anything to prohibit this moving forward. Is that is that that's a wrinkle? I think that might be a bit of a challenge. Um, so, so. So councilmember if I can jump in there, we don't need the one times in there. It's good to get enough to hear that the councilmember wants to do that. I would like some direction from the entire council that we should be focusing on creating a new program in the next couple, in the next week essentially, and working with the VA so that we would requests to be part of the motion to get council direction. And the one times we can follow up the actual dollar amount, we'll follow up separately. Okay. I guess I can accept that idea. Okay. But how do you guys want to do it. Is is good. I just think we need to be ready. And it's the 4th of July help support our readiness. Yes. I agree. And several residents have actually brought that idea forward as well. And so I appreciate you including it. Thank you. Thank you very much. Congressman, just an got a one year. Thank you very that. So I, I support the direction that this is going. I, I it's not lost on me, though, that we are in a moment when we are talking about what kind of responses our community wants to see. And it's not lost on me that we have kind of two different groups that are asking us for changes. One of them is asking for more police presence and one of them is asking us for less. So I really love getting the prosecutor involved and talking about a statewide strategy, talking about where we can kind of stop the inflow of this. And some of my constituents have shared with me photos of, you know, our grocery stores or Ralphs or Vons and our targets that are selling some of the smaller fireworks that are selling them nonetheless. And so, Tom, could you share with everyone what they should be doing if they see that at a store right now? So if the question is if illegal fireworks are being sold at stores, they are not allowed to be sold at stores in Long Beach. So Lakewood does allow what are called safe and sane, but you may not sell those pretty municipal code in Long Beach, and that's a crime that should be reported. Right. And they can still report that through the new website that that Doug Halbert is doing. Correct. I think we'd prefer those to be reported in to you dispatch order. You can get them to their council office and we'll follow up from both a code enforcement business license perspective and also a criminal perspective with PD. Okay, so we mentioned dispatch. One of the other concerns that's been brought up to me by several constituents is when they call dispatch, because this is a lower level crime and they don't feel like they're getting the best response. So I just want to make sure that I say publicly for all my constituents that have reached out so that the chief or whoever's in charge of dispatch can make sure that there's proper training happening on how to respond to those calls. I know it must be frustrating because the whole city is blowing up at the same time, so I can't imagine being a dispatcher at that time. That must be irritating. We appreciate we appreciate that, councilmember. And you're exactly right. Dispatchers are extremely busy with fireworks calls. I've indicated earlier that we've already seen a dramatic increase in the number of calls over last year, but they are responsible for entering those calls for service as they receive them. Often we get multiple calls for the same incident. So they do try to do some screening of those so that we limit the number of duplicates that might be in the system. But it is it's it's an extremely busy time for the dispatchers as it is for law enforcement officers out in the field trying to respond to those as well. We look forward to working with the prosecutor's office, with the new portal that he is introducing, as well as the police department is establishing email addresses as well, where we will be referring those callers who indicate that they have video or pictures to to share. We will be utilizing that technology and when referring callers to that. Thank you for that. And I think that the. The collaborative effort is important because as already noted through the rest of the conversation, what's happening in neighborhoods is somebody calls the police because somebody is doing fireworks. Maybe they get there in time and then the police go and talk to the people. The police don't see them, so they can't cite them. The neighbor maybe sees them. But my neighbors don't want to file against somebody that's not doing fireworks because they don't want somebody to know where they live. And so there's a real fear that many people have about doing an arrest that way. And that, for me, is why I think working with the prosecutor, working at the state level is so important. And I hope that maybe you guys can continue to have creative ideas about how community members can share information, but that doesn't put them at risk. And. Does not mean that we have officers coming out to basically just shoot off some people when there's not a citation happening or there could be a situation of an increased anxiety there. And then the last question I had on enforcement with this is. Do we know what the surrounding finds are around the city outside of Long Beach? I've heard some subsidies are 2000 or 3000. And it's just curious. We have that data. This is Tom. To my knowledge, it's it's regulated by the state, so it's a misdemeanor with a maximum of $1,000. So if there is anyone that has seen a city with something higher, we'd be very interested in that. Our research to date shows that this is not a city spying that set the maximum set by state law. Great. And I know that was mentioned earlier. I just wanted to make sure we tease that out one more time. And then for enforcement, I mean, it seems like fire is a responsible party because they if there is a fire caused by these guys. I'm just wondering if there's any other role for any other departments to play. So I would ask that question of the team as you guys are working on this. And the last thing I'll say is, if there's a way for the for the alert Long Beach, for there to be a notice, to go out through that alert about how to file complaints on fireworks, I think that would be really helpful to make sure that the city is is playing a key role in educating people on the right steps to take. I know that in the past we've done things like sending postcards or putting something in people's bills, and I know that's really expensive, but I would hope that after the program is finalized that we can send that information out. Thank you. And the alert Long Beach is scheduled by the by the public affairs team, and that's scheduled for Friday to go out to announce the new program and how you can help us track through data where fireworks are happening and to get specific complaints about properties to the city prosecutor. Can I ask one more question? What we're talking about this on. There was some chat a while back whenever we started the COVID crisis and trying to get information about the DMV playing a role in connecting people who have driver's licenses in the city of Long Beach to the city of Long Beach's alert Long Beach, is that something that's happened or could potentially happen to make sure that we're getting contact with more people? I don't think we've quite heard that in terms of the DMV's role. We get it through a firm and we basically have everybody's land line in our database, and then we ask people to opt in through cell phones. So if there's another way to get additional numbers that we can expand our reach, we'd be interested in looking at that. Okay. I think that's all. Thank you. Thank you. This is the government. And they have. Thank you, Vice Mayor. I just was queuing up because I had thought that I had thickened on that motion a bit earlier, but not sure if that was captured. And nice of you to come to Austin. Thank you. I think we've. We really had a great conversation and I really appreciate the feedback from all of my colleagues and it's a very important item. Again, you know, I will acknowledge that this is a unique time and an odd issue to be in talking about enforcement. But, you know, we do live in a society made up of laws. And this is about being a good neighbor. This is about, you know, respecting your know, your neighbor and the community as a whole and understanding that these aren't these aren't safe. The same fireworks that we're talking about necessarily, although all fireworks are illegal, these are explosives. These are very disruptive to the quality of life, but also to the mental health of many of our our neighbors and residents. And so let's keep that in mind as we move forward. Appreciate the conversation. And I look forward to hopefully some productive results out of this. Thank you. Because when I stood up to come in. Thank you. There's public comment for this item. I believe there are eight callers on the line. First up is Seagram's. Your time starts now. Seagrams, are you there? Hello. Next speaker is. And Sheryl. Your time starts now. Thank you. My name is. I live my name. I'm Cheryl. I live in District two. First off, I just want to start by saying, as was just said a little bit ago, we are not talking about safe and sane folks here. We're talking about dangerous explosives that are legal statewide. Some of them, the eighties and up are illegal on a federal level. So we're not talking about little baby fireworks. We're talking about things are dangerous. They set fires. They're dangerous to be near. I've had my back patio scoured by firewood from my neighbor two doors over the days and education are nice and all that, but a lot of these people are shooting these off. No, they're shooting off illegal fireworks. They know they're breaking the law and they don't care because they know they won't be caught, because they know that even when when police come out to their doors, unless they've seen it happening, nothing will happen to them. They just deny that they've done it and continue to do it as soon as the police leave. My neighbors do that. My neighbor did it just the other night when I called the cops on them. They let them off as soon as the cops left. In fact, those same neighbors I confronted a few weeks ago about firing off fireworks and mentioned that it terrifies my dog. Not only did they basically just tell me to go f off, but they told me that they hope my dogs died and became very intimidating to me. I'm a spy to middle aged woman, and even though I have a very fiery personality, having to confront people, putting off fireworks is dangerous for me. These people don't care that it's illegal, which means that they don't care if I'm asking them to stop because my dogs are scared or because kids. Are scared or. That they're scared, they basically just slip their fingers off of this and continue to do it. And if we try to say anything more to them, they become belligerent and confrontational and intimidating and threatening to us. One of the things that I have a problem with is that I've we've actually in my neighborhood in Rose Park had police that we've called out who are down the street from fireworks going off that we had given them addresses for. And they aren't doing anything. They just are. You're chatting with somebody they just took a report from when there's fireworks literally a half a block away that both me and a friend of mine at separate time pointed out to an officer. And he was like, Yeah, yeah, I'm going to be there in a minute. By the time he got there, there was a huge fight breaking out among people. So the fireworks are now forgotten. When we called in the same addresses over and over again, and I personally called in one address literally every single night for three weeks. It took that much of me calling and other people calling on the same address over and over and over again for the police to actually finally do what they should have been doing, which is waiting down the block. A friend of mine witnessed it happen, waiting down the block until these people saw the fireworks again and bussing them for it. Finally, thank God, because that particular address has been keeping me up night after night after night. We need to. Thank you for your comment. Next up, we have Sheryl Simmons. Your time starts now. Thank you. Thank you. Mayor Garcia and city council members who have heard our pleas and have shown. Up. Positive action in the last week with regards to the illegal explosive problems happening throughout our city. My name is Cheryl Sanchez Simmons. And on behalf of District two, I urge the passing of the agenda item 25. That is it as it is a good beginning to stopping these illegal explosives. I would also like to ask that Councilwoman Pierce have an open dialog with the residents in District two. Councilman Austin recently held a town hall on this issue for the residents in District nine. This would be productive for all of us that live in the area to come up with ideas and solutions to stop the bombardment here in District two. Thank you, city prosecutor Doug Halbert for giving us a tool to use to report those offenders directly to the city. I am hoping that law enforcement now begins to take this problem seriously and does not continue to turn a blind eye when they see the offenders shooting off murders like they have been seen doing in this past week. I would also continue to suggest an anonymous hotline that people can leave addresses and not fear retaliation. Just a reminder that the Facebook group Long Beach against illegal fireworks with over 1500 members has gathered data and does have a map of. Where these explosives are being detonated. Please keep the dialog. Open with the residents of Long Beach on this issue as it takes a community. To help solve this problem. I am still willing to be part of a resident task force, along with city leaders, to help come up with solutions to this problem. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, we have Claudia Vega. Your time starts now. Hi. I am a concerned resident of District nine. The reckless use of fireworks in our community have become a danger to ourselves and our property. A few years ago, my parents home caught on fire. And just last year, our neighbor's backyard went up in flames on 4th of July. My elderly parents cannot leave their home the days leading up to the 4th of July and fear of their home catching on fire again. No one should live in the fear. We find ourselves calling the police constantly on these offenders, but nothing is really done. The police have dropped by at the moment. They turn the corner. The explosions can begin again. As long as there are no consequences for these people, the fireworks will continue. We have to start enforcing the fines and increasing fines and or jail time. Otherwise, they will continue knowing that there are no real consequences. And just as a side note, Lakewood does have a fine of $2,000 a day. Just increase that apparently this year. We have to start making examples out of these offenders by by making them by enforcing the fines so that they receive the message that Long Beach will no longer tolerate this. Residents are putting their safety underline down the people that are terrorizing communities themselves. What we need is more police in our neighborhoods, especially District nine, that has always been neglected and deprived. These people using these explosive devices have no regard to other people's property. Last year we had a group of people lighting them up right next to our own garage. The police were called, but never came. My husband had to go outside and confront the group himself and take matters into his own hands. This can create an unsafe situation, which is why we need our calls to be taken more seriously. I've heard several testimonies from residents that are 911 calls are not being taken seriously. There have also been several fires here in our district that have probably been caused by illegal fireworks recently in the Deep Pass Park area. There was also a young man who recently lost his hand while lighting up this explosive. If it wasn't for a Facebook page, I mean, I would have never heard of this incident. We have to take these tragedies as opportunities to educate the public. When this happens in our neighborhood, the people we know, it's easier for us to relate. We need to do more. Some of the things some residents have discussed as possible solutions are to increase the fines and to impose them to use the Long Beach alert tax to continuously remind residents of illegal fireworks. We have also heard of the use of drones and other studies. And we need we need more police on bikes in our neighborhoods. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Next up is Jamie Larsen. Your time starts now. Thank you very much, Mayor Garcia, and the city council people this evening. I think there's been some really, really great feedback here and many of you have really had your thumb on the pulse of what's going on. I think that we can hear in everyone's voice and everyone's concerned and something that I would like to suggest and would be more than happy to for as far as the residents to help organize, is that it's a bit difficult to try to organize chaos in chaos, and I think it will realistic. We're going to understand that this is going to go through Labor Day. It did last year. And there seems to be a resolve in Long Beach this time of year. But it's like, yeah, well, it kind of happens this time of year. So how about when it calms down in the timeframe that it's not happening? Let's keep the momentum going. And I'd love to know how we as residents, all of these suggestions are great, but they're in midst of a panic. And so I love to keep the momentum going and find out exactly how we can pass these things. So the 2021 is our goal because I don't want to be a downer, but we're in this right now, and this fight is difficult for the police. It's difficult for our elected officials and obviously for our residents. So we could come up with suggestions and then have a better idea next year of how to do it. Like maybe a hotline that doesn't take up of dispatchers time, something that's more specific that we get when we know what's coming or that we know what's happening. A councilman earlier asked, and forgive me, I don't remember your name about surrounding areas. Pasadena. Just as an example, if you are caught with fireworks in your car, your car is immediately impounded. For anyone dealing with fireworks, you may spend up to a year in jail and the fines go up to $50,000. So there are different amounts that are around there. Another suggestion that I thought that we could work on throughout the year is everybody understands that when they go through a construction zone, if you are caught speeding, it's double the fine. So maybe we keep the thousand dollar fine from October to May and then June through September. It is a ridiculously high fine because I hate to say it, but fear changes people and having to pay a lot of money and the fear of being put in jail, that is unfortunately what creates change when we're talking about the situation. Drinking and driving became $20,000 and would literally ruin your life. And that's when things started to change. It's sad, but it's true. So my thoughts on this and just understanding more about it is I love to have a future meeting with more questions. I have a few more about the portal, so I'd love for that not to just sort of end with the summer and I am in District six, so I would be more than happy to help organize any district that wants to speak throughout the year and make sure that we're really well organized. And we don't just sort of forget this after Labor Day. But again, I want to thank our police department and our elected officials, because the Facebook page became 1500 people in less than a year. And I think. Next we have Kathleen. S Your time starts now. Hi. My name is Kathleen Shane. I live in District eight. I wanted to first thank you, Austin, for the meeting on June 15th and the action plan that you put together and Doug Hopper for the portal for us to report issues with fireworks. Jamie did mention about the drones and the cameras. I wanted to add that to see if that's something that's feasible. Also, our our the task force that we have for the four officers, are they on patrol on bikes or cars? And in addition, I just wanted to comment on some of the items that were brought up by council members. One of them was PTSD for the vets. But there's also a lot of people that do suffer with PTSD, not just veterans. So I wanted to know if that would open up to other people that do suffer from PTSD. Also, I agree with the California statewide. We need to look at the California laws. I am looking at one right now where it shows that there are misdemeanors for illegal fireworks and also felonies for illegal. Fireworks for quantity. I feel that that's where we need to address. Also, I wanted to. Talk about if we do the California state wide mandate, try to implement some laws regarding that, would that be able to have. Checkpoints. For people coming into our state that are coming. From. States that are high volume of purchasing these items? And I think that is all I wanted to say. Thank you. And I wanted to thank the city council and everybody for their passion. Regarding this issue. Thank you. Next, we have Samantha Hardy. Your time starts now. Hello, City Council. My name is Samantha Hardy, and I live in District seven of Long Beach. And I just have to say that something really needs to be done with these fireworks. I've lived in this district my whole life, and it has never been this bad. I hear all these signs that say fireworks are illegal in Long Beach, but you wouldn't be able to tell that if you came to my neighborhood. And I'm going to comment this in sort of a personal sort of a personal level right now. My mom's high blood pressure is through the roof with all these fireworks. And my uncle's going to be coming home in the next few days after having a triple bypass so he won't be really able to take them either. I've had to endure these fireworks and explosions through my whole ear surgery recovery process. And let's not forget about our furry friends that live not only in this house, but in all the other houses that are absolutely terrified. I've spoken to many of my neighbors and they're upset about this situation. My mom and I call every night and it seems like nothing is done. I'm part of the group on Facebook that's trying to help stop this. But when we're met with dial tones or operators who just don't care, then we kind of feel helpless. These explosions go on for hours and they are terrorizing our neighborhood. Something needs to be done because it's been going on since March and it will continue to go on. As a teacher, I know that sometimes teaching can only do so much, and these people who are firing off fireworks every night need more than a talking to or a warning. Thank you very much for your time. Thank you. Our last speaker is Seagram. Your time starts now. See Graham. Yes. Listen, my mom's on call every day. Hi. Is this sort of agenda item 25? Yes. I think it's absolutely disgraceful. My name is Caitlyn and I live in District three. I think it's absolutely disgraceful that you are continually continuing to criminalize people. We are calling for defunding of the police of liberty. And she. Instead of walking in the streets calling you to do council members, you have a constituency, you have a people to hear and you public people to act on behalf of. We are the people and we are asking you to defund the police. This measure on fireworks is absolutely ridiculous for the penalize and criminalize people. Shame on all of you. Shame on each one of you. And the price especially. Shame on you as my district comp person. This is absurd. We need to have a total restructuring of the things that are going on in the city. I yield my time. Thank you. And that concludes public comment for this item. Thank you. Let's go ahead and take a roll call vote then on this item, please. District one. I district to. I'm district three. I. District or. My. District by district six. Five. District seven. District seven. District eight. Hi. District nine. Hi. Motion carries. Okay. Thank you. Move carries on item 25. So now we're going to be moving on to item number 26, please.

A bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification for 935 West 11th Avenue in Lincoln Park. Approves an official map amendment to rezone property located at 935 West 11th Avenue from U-RH-2.5 to U-MX-2x (urban, row-home to urban, mixed-use) in Council District 3. If ordered published, a public hearing will be held on Monday, 4-9-18. The Committee approved filing this bill at its meeting on 2-27-18.

DenverCityCouncil_04092018_18-0170

On the presentation monitor. On the wall you will see your time counting down. Speakers must stay on the topic of the hearing and must direct their comments to the council members. Please refrain from profane or obscene speech. Direct your comments to council as a whole and please refrain from individual or personal attacks. Councilman Nu, will you please put Constable 170 on the floor? Yes, Madam Chair. I move the Council Bill one seven to be placed by final consideration and do pass. Okay. We're waiting for a second. It has been moved and seconded. The public hearing for Councilor Bill 170 is open. May we have the Step five report? Welcome, Scott. Thank you. Scott Robinson with Community Planning and Development. This is a request to rezone 935 West 11th avenue from you are h 2.5 to U Annex two X property is located in Council District three in the Lincoln Park neighborhood. It's on 11th Avenue between Kalama Street and Santa Fe Drive Properties, about 6500 square feet. And it's currently the home of the scum of the Earth Church. Request is to rezone from U RH 2.5, which has urban neighborhood context rowhouse zoning with a two and a half storey maximum height to you annex two X, which is still urban neighborhood context mixed use zoning with a two storey maximum height and the X indicates that there are additional restrictions in the zoning to ensure compatibility with surrounding residential properties. The applicant is requesting the rezoning to allow for retail uses in the the church. The intend to keep the church there. But also want to add some additional uses. The surrounding zoning to the north and west is the same. You are h 2.5 that stretches along the east side of Kalama street, north to the east along Santa Fe Drive is CMC, which is Main Street eight story zoning north of 11th Avenue and then south of 11th CMC five, which is Main Street five story zoning. Current use, as I mentioned, is a church further north along Kalama Street are single unit residential along Santa Fe Drive, a mix of uses with commercial, retail, office, industrial and residential, and then a variety of residential uses throughout the Lincoln Park neighborhood to the south and across. Ellsworth is a daycare. And then on the other side of the alley is the Colorado Ballet. You can see the existing church building on the top left of that photo there and then some of the surrounding uses in the other photos. This went to planning board on February 7th. They voted 8 to 1 to recommend approval. There were four members of the public that spoke at that meeting, went to the Land Use Transportation Infrastructure Committee on February 27th, and you'll notice in the packet there is a letter of support from the Lincoln Park Neighborhood Association, and we have received no other public comment at this time. In order to approve a resounding, the city must find that these five criteria have been met. The first criterion is consistency with adopted plans. There are three plans that apply to this property. The first is Comprehensive Plan 2000, as described in the staff report. Staff has found that the proposed rezoning is consistent with these five strategies from Top Plan 2000, mostly relating to infill development, mixed use development and creating neighborhood commercial centers, which the proposed rezoning would facilitate. The second plan is Blueprint Denver from 2000 to the concept of land use in Blueprint Denver for this property is urban residential, which calls for higher density, primarily residential, but also a noteworthy number of complementary commercial uses, which is what would be allowed by the UN text to X zoning, either residential or commercial development or the existing civic use. It's also designated an area of stability which the plan recommends maintaining the character of the areas while accommodating some new development and redevelopment. The proposed umx2x would allow development and uses consistent with the existing character. It's currently a nonresidential structure that would remain the case, and there's a mixture of of residential and nonresidential throughout the Lincoln Park neighborhood. 11th Avenue is designated as a mixed use collector, which calls for mixed use development along the streets with slightly higher intensity, which is again consistent with the proposed annexed two X zoning. The third plan is the Lincoln Park neighborhood plan from 2010. The plan designates this as part of the residential character area, which calls for generally stability supported by appropriate zoning. But it also calls for support services such as those that would be provided or could be provided under the new annex to ex zoning. More specifically, this is in the townhouse land use area in the land use map for the plan which calls for rowhouse zoning recommended as an example of the existing you RH 2.5 zoning. But it also encourages a mixture of uses and says other uses may be consistent or appropriate if they are substantially mitigated, which is what the new annexed two X zoning district is intended to do. There are other calls for providing these sort of neighborhood services and buffers from the commercial development along Santa Fe to the neighborhood, which would also be provided by the proposed duplex. Two X zoning also recommends a three storey maximum height. The proposed zoning would have a two storey maximum height, 35 feet, which is the same maximum height as the existing you RH 2.5. So overall staff finds the proposed rezoning consistent with the recommendations of the Lama Lincoln Park Neighborhood Plan and the first criterion met. The second criterion is uniformity of district regulations. Staff finds that the proposed rezoning would result in the uniform application of the U.N. text to ex zone district. The third criterion is to further the public health, safety and general welfare of the city. Staff finds that the proposed rezoning would do so by implementing the city's adopted plans and allowing for additional neighborhood serving amenities in the Lincoln Park neighborhood. The fourth criterion is justifying circumstances, staff finds. If the proposed rezoning is justified by the changed and changing conditions in the area, there's increased residential density in the area, some redevelopment, particularly the Mariposa District development, just two blocks to the west. But there's also been additional development in the area and along Santa Fe. Notably the Colorado Ballet Building just across to 11th Avenue. These changes have increased residential density, increased commercial activity, increased the demand for a mix of uses to make it appropriate to rezone this property to annex two acts. The fifth criterion is consistency with neighborhood context, zone, district purpose and intent. Staff finds that the proposed rezoning would allow development that is consistent with the urban neighborhood context, description and the purpose and intent of the U.N. next to zone district. And therefore, staff finds that all five criteria are met and recommends approval on the answer. Answering Questions. Thank you very much, Scott. We have three speakers tonight and I'll just call you up. Jesse Holman, William Moore and Sekou Wood. Jesse Harmon, please come to the podium. Hello. Good evening. My name is Jessie Hileman. I live at 3531 Milwaukee Street, so I reside in Councilman Brooks district. And then I am the senior pastor of the Scum of the Earth Church. And so I do quite a bit of investment in Councilman Lopez's district. Yeah. Skipping the what has already been mentioned specifically, what we are intending to do is create a retail shop for roller derby products. There is there was a shop on Broadway is closed down a couple of years ago. And we would like to replace replace that hole in the community of roller derby. We have a lot of overlap with our community, our church community and with our and with the roller derby community. They're both incredibly positive communities, and yet we still have a lot to learn from each other. And there's like a great meshing of that they were hoping for. It's a we already have investment in the neighborhood in other ways. Music. Bicycles for kids in the neighborhood. Things like that. And yet. Roller derby is fairly large, relatively speaking, in Denver. We have one of the top five teams in the world and another top top 30 team here in Denver as well. So it's we have a draw for a roller derby in Denver and we actually pull in. This would be a landmark visit for the state and even surrounding states because there is not much in the way of retail for this. So thank you, Mr. Howard. Appreciate it. William Moore. Wilmore. I live at 1112 Kalamazoo. I've lived there for 25 years. A lot of my neighbors are multi-generational. If this zoning. Goes through, will this be opening the whole neighborhood up to be a reason to for multi-use? Am I going to be losing residential in the neighborhood to multi-use? Are we going to, you know, just kick everybody out and. Let them fend for themselves. That's about all I have to say. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Moore. Sekou. Yes, ma'am. My name is Chairman Sekou. I represent the Black Star Action Movement for Self-defense, whose client base is poor, working poor students. Retired folks. Pretty much. You're scum of the earth. And we take pride in approving this ordinance because we have a direct relationship with the people who are struggling to be self-supporting and to be an asset to the community. And not only that, but the truth is everything that they talked about conforms exactly to all the plans, regulations and whatnot. So that in and of itself is enough to have a unanimous, unanimous vote on this thing. And when you add on to what is going to be able to happen there, but they're going to be able to plug the gap of services that have disappeared so that they can reappear to enhance the development of what they do. That's our standard. That's outstanding. So I can't see how you would not vote to approve this. And we want to thank Paul for bringing this forward. And we want to thank. I am going to do it. What Paul did. You know, because you're the queen mother, because people don't remember. You just do this all the time. I was here when you did two terms of this. So thank you for being here and your leadership and. My daughter's watching you, Ben Franklin. So thank you very much. And that's all I got. Thank you, Mr. Sekou. That is it concludes our speakers questions from counsel. And I see no questions. It's taken a while. It is. Oh. Councilman Lewis. Thank you, Madam President. If you want to come up to the. To the podium, sir. Mr. Peebles. Right. If you want to talk, I don't just want to just be. So skate shop is just what it sounds like. You sound roller skates, selling equipment, or is it a facility where you're skating it? I just want to make that clear on the record. It will primarily remain a church scum of the Earth Church. But yes, we will have retail hours selling product. But like I said, community is very important to both our church and to roller derby in general. So a lot of community events happening in the building for that purpose. Okay. If I can ask you this question, I mean, I know the area very well, but. On that block. What other uses exist that you're aware of as just residential? There is there's one residential property we have commercial directly to the east. There's the Colorado Ballet, of which my daughter is one of our students, and then a daycare directly to the south. So, yeah, there is there is one residence that borders us, but the rest is retail. Yeah. So it's my mama. A 7-Eleven on the corner. Yeah. 7-Eleven is two doors down to for myself as a magical across the block. Yeah. So there's the. Would you consider that like a mix of residential or just mostly. It's yeah, it seems to be mostly commercial, but. And then but if you go west, it is, it turns into residential. Actually, we consider our church and our mixed use the mixed use zoning and an elegant to transition from the commercial to the residents. Scum of the Earth Church. Are you here to recruit the City Council? Recruiter Oh, we're all scum of the earth. Yes, that's what we consider. Is that all your question? That's all my question. Okay. Last night. Councilman Flynn, Councilman Cashman had kind of put his hand up before I saw your thing. Do you mind if we let him go ahead or do you want to arm wrestle for it? I think I like to arm wrestle and actually. But. All right. Councilman Flynn. That's because two comes before six. Okay. Scott, could you address Mr. Moore's question as to the impact that the CBD sees as having on the block? Yeah. If other properties wanted to request to rezoning, they would have the right to do so and we would evaluate it against the the plans and the criteria. I think this property is a bit unique because it is existing nonresidential use, whereas the rest of that rowhouse on council's side is existing residential and it's directly adjacent to the existing commercial development along Santa Fe. So, you know, without having an application in front of me, I can't tell you what we would recommend on other other applications. But I do think that this property has some characteristics that would set it apart from other residential properties in the area. Okay. And thank you. Let me make sure I understand again, Pastor. I'm sorry. Your name again. What will be different in the functioning of the property, or is it still going to be used as a. Church for services? Yes. Primarily. You're just adding in church. Yeah. Adding that there'll be primarily afternoon, we'll add signage to the outside and that's the only physical change to the outside. Okay. Mr. Moore, could I ask you a question? Yes. A question. Mr. Moore, would you like to come to. Could you mostly. You came up in your testimony and you asked a question. Can I ask you to make a statement, make an affirmative statement as what are your concerns with this rezoning? What what's your concern about it? Well, I'm right next to the right. You are right. Literally on the same side of the aisle. Yeah, at the front three. I have the front half of three lots. They have the back half. Right. And my major concern is it's going to be a roller derby concert venue, which is just destroys my life, you know, my retirement. I, you know, I've spent 25 years really working on that property. And I'd like to retire there now. I'd like I like my neighborhood. I'd like it to stay residential. I'm really concerned about the roller derby and the concert venue. Okay. Thank you. Pastor, could you address that? What what will be going on in terms of I mean, you're not doing roller derby in the building. They were there could be we had, you know, a sanctuary, a fairly large space. So you had probably be some test of the product inside the building. Infrequently, concert venue. We are not technically a concert venue, but our usage is quasi public for religious gathering. We do have worship services. We have music there. Which have music. Okay. Not Gregorian chant, I imagine. No, no. I'm just curious. I can still read Gregorian chant. Madam President, I defer to Councilman Cashman. All right. Thank you, Councilman. Councilman Cashman. Thank you. Pastor, if you don't mind. So. Is there. Or maybe Scotland need to answer this as well. Is there licensing or they could they hold paid concerts or things of that nature at this church? Admission for free concert specifically? No, not at this time. I mean, there's some exceptions that would have to be made to the usage, I think for that. And the church itself is is not structured. So there would be actual roller derby contests? Oh, no, definitely not. And how much space do you expect to be devoted to this retail use? The retail offerings will actually be movable, so they will be be able to be put away. I mean, a few. Hundred square feet. At about 4 to 500 square feet. Okay. And how large is the building itself? Altogether, I think we're at 2100. Thank you. Thank you, Pastor Scott. What was the one no vote at the planning board about? Yes. As I recall, the planning board member had concerns about specifically the fourth criterion, the justifying circumstances, and that there wasn't enough change to justify. If this if the church went away and it went entirely retail, that that change would not be appropriate. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilman. Are there any other questions? I'll look up and down. All right, Paul, you. Did you have another question? Is it. Not? Yeah. Is it a it's not. It's not working quite right. Okay. No, no, it just came up. Go ahead. Yeah. If you want to come back to the. No, I'm right. Sorry, Steph. So it, it appears that there's a it appears that there's a church now at our church use is allowed in residential. This I mean one of our churches that play music allowed in residential areas. Yeah. I mean churches are allowed in pretty much all zone districts are subject to certain restrictions in some cases. I don't know the specific requirements related to playing of music. I think generally that's considered incidental to the church use. But the city attorney's here, they may be able to provide more direction on that. If that doesn't answer your question. I just don't I don't think they need to. I just wanted to just based on zoning in that I mean, I don't know if maybe the city attorney wanted to. Do you do you want me do you want to address that question? Is it? One is. I just want to get your expertize in terms of the church that plays music in a neighborhood like this residential zone district allowed in. Is it breaking any laws by doing this? No. The church should be allowed to play music associated with their services. They may need some type of permit if they're going to hold a special event or something along those lines. But as far as playing music related to their services, they could do that. Thank you. Sure. Thank you, Nick. Did you have any other questions, Councilman? No, ma'am. All right. Thank you. Is there anyone else who has questions? No. That closed the public hearing and asked for comments from council members. Councilman Lopez. Thank you, Madam President. I really appreciate the the staff report and also the. The request when you go over to for me, when you go over to the site and I've seen this plenty of times I graduated from West High School in. In the late nineties and this was our route back and forth. There was different churches there at different times. If this was a new use, that was a venue that played concerts. I mean, it was not ever in existence as it is. I'd be, you know, and be a little bit more open to hearing and possibly being a little bit concerned, primarily if it was residential. What makes me feel good about this rezoning is on 11th Avenue. It's all commercial, almost. You have a car lot. You got the ballet. You have. You have 7-Eleven, which is busy all the time. And you're only a block off of Santa Fe Drive. And being that close in an existing structure that has been a church before. There's really nothing you can do against that right now. Retail. This is the only reason why, from what I understand, is going to use is because you want to do retail. You actually want to sell, sold things out of the shop. That in and of itself is the question at hand. I don't see anything that would. That would be problematic if it. You know, I know that the Lama Lincoln Park Neighborhood Association wrote a letter in support and they're very particular. When you when you talk about llama Lincoln Park and this and this part of the neighborhood, the existing structures and uses, you know, they're very particular and they're very diligent in sitting down and talking it over and making sure that this is something that does not displace anybody. There's nobody living there right now. So there's nobody is being displaced. It looks like this old church that has been have different iterations over time is just being reoccupied again for the scum of the Earth Church. So having said that, I, I don't see any problem with this. It does conform to the to our requirements. And I. Madam President, I think it's good to go. All right. Thank you, Councilman. Any other comments? Just looking up and down. No seeing no other comments. Madam Secretary, Raquel Lopez. I knew Ortega, I. Flynn No. Gilmore, I. Cashman. I can eat. Madam President, I too. Madam Secretary, close the voting and announce the results. Seven eyes, one nay. Seven eyes, one nay. Count for 170 has passed. Okay, now, Councilman Nu, will you please put Council Bill 172 on the floor?

A letter dated February 14, 2020 from Michael B. Hancock, Mayor, notifying City Council of his veto of Council Bill 20-0071.

DenverCityCouncil_02242020_20-0193

There's a lot at stake. The numbers from the census help determine federal funding to support services and infrastructure for the people we serve. You'll hear all of us talking more about the census as we get closer to April 1st. If you want more information, please visit Denver gov dawg slash census 2020. All right. That concludes the announcements for this evening. There are no presentations, but we do have one communication. Madam Secretary, will you please read our communication? 2193 A letter dated February 14th, 2020 from Michael V Hancock Mayor notifying City Council of his veto of Council Bill 20 zero zero 71. Council President Clark and Members of City Council. Over the past several days, I have heard from thousands of residents passionately expressing their opinions on both sides of this issue. I want to thank everybody who has shared their views, especially those I have spoken to personally experts in veterinary care, animal care and control, as well as residents of our city who have had experiences with the pit bull breeds, all to gain a broader understanding of what this change would mean for our community and those who own these dogs. After deep reflection and consideration, I find that I cannot in good conscience support this legislation and will exercise my authority as mayor to veto it. Let me say at the outset that I salute the sponsor of this ordinance, Councilman Herndon, and his fellow council members who have tried to craft legislation that creates a data and licensing system for these breeds that is supported by veterinary experts and encourages owners of pit bull breeds to manage their pets. Unfortunately, less than 20% of all pets in Denver are currently licensed, which raises significant questions about the effectiveness of this proposed new system. While much progress has been made in recent years to increase that number, more intentional efforts around responsible pet ownership, dog licensure and registration and off leash dogs are needed before this proposal should be considered. The reality is that irresponsible pet owners continue to be a problem and it is the irresponsible owners and their dogs I must consider in evaluating and the overall impact of this ordinance. We cannot diminish the very real, very traumatic experiences of those who have reached out to me to share their stories. Well, I appreciate the effort that Councilman Herndon has put into crafting this ordinance and its guardrails. I do not believe this ordinance fully addresses the very real risk to severe injury that can result from attacks from these particular dog breeds, especially should they happen to a child. At the end of the day. I must ask whether passage of this ordinance would make our homes and neighborhoods safer or pose an increased risk risk to public safety. I have concluded that it will pose an increased risk. Increased risk. I encourage members of City Council to reconsider their approach to this ordinance, which has been in the municipal code for over three decades. If we were to make this change now and harm comes to someone as a result, then we have done a disservice to the people of this great city. Respectfully, Michael B Hancock Mayor. Thank you, Madam Secretary. The communication regarding regarding the veto of Council Bill 2271 is received and filed. All right, Councilman Herndon, I understand that in on this issue, you have a motion to override the veto. On Council Bill 2071.

Councilor Louijeune called Docket # 0321, Petition for a Special Law re: Securing Environmental Justice in the City of Boston, from the Committee on Government Operation. No objection being heard, the matter was before the body. Councilor Edwards motioned to amend language. Second Councilor Breadon. On motion of Councilor Louijeune, the Petition was passed as amended.

BostonCC_03022022_2022-0321

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Clarke. Docket zero to Tokyo has passed. Motions, orders and resolutions. Mr. Quiroga, please. We talk at zero 3 to 1. Ducking number zero 3 to 1. Councilor Edwards offered the following petition for a special law re securing environmental justice in the city of Boston. Thank you, Mr. Clark. I know Councilor Edwards will move to substitute the updated draft in central staff already distributed the new draft. At this time, I call on City Councilor Edwards. Do you have the floor? Thank you very much, Mr. President. Am very excited to bring this to the floor for us to to introduce this new home rule petition at the end of the day. It is dealing with our constitutional rights, our recent defined rights as for environmental justice and also making sure that our zoning is in line with those rights. I want to be I don't know if anyone else has read the Constitution and our constitutional rights in Massachusetts, but Article 97 states, very clearly the people should have the right to clean air and water freedom from excessive, unnecessary noise, the natural, scenic, historic and esthetic qualities of their environment, and the protection of the people in their right to conservation, development and utilization of the agricultural, mineral, forest, water, air and other natural resources is hereby declared to be a public purpose. So in our own Constitution, we have the right to clean air and water. Moreover, and part of that conversation continued as of last year, when we defined environmental justice principles and our general laws . Those principles meaning that the people. That people in the Commonwealth. Shall have protection from environmental pollution and the ability to live and enjoy a clean, healthy environment regardless of race, color, income, class, handicap, gender identity, sexual orientation, national origin, ethnicity or ancestry, religious belief or English language proficiency. And those principles include the meaningful involvement of all people with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations and policies, including climate change policies, and, of course, the equitable distribution of energy and environmental benefits and environmental burdens. Our laws are very clear about our rights and the procedures that are to protect us. We are moving towards a more environmentally just state. But what isn't moving towards that is our zoning. And as many of you will know and some of you new councilors will soon learn. Boston is unique when it comes to zoning. When we want to change how we do business and how we build in the city of Boston, what we want to change is on the zoning board of Appeals. We and only the city of Boston must go to the state house. That is why this is in the form of a federal petition. Other cities and towns could easily inject and move environmental justice principles in their zoning with the snap of a finger. We must go to the State House because our system is broken. Article six, Section six of our zoning code currently allows the following. A building structure early on used to be land used or to be used by a public service corporation. Utility company may be exempted from the operation of zoning, regulation or amendment. If a competition of the corporation, the State Department of Public Utility shall, after public notice and hearing decide at the present or proposed situation of the building structure, land in question is reasonably necessary for the convenience of public welfare. In short, public utilities can simply petition the department or the public utilities to forego rezoning. And as long as the State Department of Public Utilities decides that it's best for Boston and our public welfare, that they forego and go through any process or zoning they can. Which brings me to this reason why I'm presenting this today. The East Boston substation is a perfect example of what happens when you can petition the state to determine what is better for a neighborhood and not actually have to face the individuals who will live with that permanent structure by their park, by their homes. When the city of Boston essentially abdicated their role because the utility company could simply ask to foreclose. So I'm asking you to support this homework petition because it corrects that system. That system we've been asking for and we saw it was broken. We had a five hour hearing at East Boston in many languages. We watched how the Dpu and the state agencies literally didn't include people who didn't speak English in the process for the substation. We, as you all know, have a mandate as public officials. That mandate on November 2nd made clear in every single one of our districts and of course, at the city at large, that that substation does not belong where it currently is situated and needs to go to another location. More importantly, the process that got it there was a failure. And as you know, question two is the most popular referendum we've ever had in the city of Boston getting more votes in the mayor. And of course, any individual, one of us in our districts. The time to act is now. And what I propose is this homo petition that would do three things. One for the first time if it allow for us at the city of Boston to take from the state this power that they have over us. And allows for us at the city of Boston to come up with a process. For for public utilities. If they want to be sited in our neighborhood, it then tells them, tells us or tells the city of Boston that the passing zoning commission will come up with that alternative process. We will not be going to the state House anymore to regard zoning. We will create it ourselves for public utilities and to make sure that they can move as fast as they need to. But according to our terms. And then ultimately it injects environmental justice as one of the enforcement powers of our building commission. Mission pursues me. That person already can stop a project because it's not safe, because it's not sanitary, and now because it's environmentally unjust. I want the Building Commissioner to be able to walk into a project and determine, based off of certain standards, that the environmental justice is being so violated that it cannot continue to operate and cannot continue to build. Basically, adding to the police powers of the city of Boston for our safety and for our loans that are guaranteed to us under our Constitution. As I mentioned, when I opened the right to clean air, the right to clean water, and essentially the right to live in a healthy environment. I'm hoping that you will join me. Sign on today to this Homo petition. I look forward to an expedited or close to hearing before I leave this body, and I look forward to catching this home rule on the other side. Beacon Hill. You have to know that environmental advocates are excited about this conversation and the amended version. I just wanted to note the only amendment was put in to make sure that our waterfront was also part of the enforcement protection from the building commissioner. Ultimately, this is where we need to go. This is where we are going as a state, as a country. We need our zoning to be updated, to include environmental justice standards and to protect our neighborhoods. And I hope you'll join me in doing that. Thank you. Thank you, Councilor Edwards. Would anyone else like to speak on this matter? Would anyone else like to ask? That she recognizes counsel, clarity, counsel, clarity of the focus. Should obviously commend their colleague for her work on this and through the chance for her want to see whether or not there's an opportunity with existing sites that are not good neighbors and have been polluting. Is there a way through this legislation to maybe kind of hook back on to those and work with, you know, some city officials, etc., to maybe talk about either moving them or in finding more appropriate locations? Or are they, I guess, technically grandfathered? Right. I would because obviously I'm supportive of calling in for efforts in East Boston. But we can go across the city and you sit there and you say, how did that happen and why is that there ? And I heard about this. So. Is there a way through this legislation that will be able to kind of go back in time and identify sites that are inappropriate in those particular locations and then work with those entities to maybe move them to more appropriate locations? Again, just a question for the chair to make it count. Councilor Edwards. Thank you very much. As the standards for sanitation grow, as the standards and enforcement standards grow, and any other aspect of which the building commissioner can enforce our zoning laws, then they would have the same standards and the ability to grow and stop works on existing environmental injustices. So it isn't just that we don't like something. And I want to be very clear, this isn't a NIMBY move to stop infrastructure. We do need and need to talk about how we are building for our electrical grid. There is no doubt at some point we will need versions of substations in all neighborhoods. The issue with this one was the process that there wasn't an actual open assessment of the data used by Eversource. The fact that we weren't allowed to question it and moreover the fact that they didn't even think of green alternatives. And that would have happened, I believe. And we can zoned that and require that to happen going forward. But with the building commissioners, police enforcement powers, if there's an active environmental injustice, they should be under this law able to stop it, to move it. Well, that might be something you might want to put in a friendly amendment in the future. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you. Thank you. Counsel. I would think. Counsel. Clarity. Anyone else like to speak on this or your name? Mr. Clarke, please add Counselor Arroyo. Counselor Bach. Counselor Braden. Counsel Fernandez Andersen. Counsel. Clarity Counsel. Laura Counsel. Illusion Counsel. Murphy Counsel. Overall, please add the chair. Dawkins zero 3 to 1 will be referred to the Committee on Government Operations. Mr. Clerk, please read docket 032 to please.

Recommendation to respectfully request City Council approval of the 2017 State Legislative Agenda as recommended by the State Legislation Committee.

LongBeachCC_03212017_17-0014

Motion passes six zero. Next, there's requests to continue item number 32. My understanding it does require a motion. Councilman Austin. So move. Okay. It's been seconded by councilman. I'm sorry. Do we continue to a date certain? April for April. Thank you. Okay. Motion will continue to April 4th. Is any public comment on the motion? Seeing the members, please cast your vote. Motion carry six zero. Thank you. And that concludes our agenda. So now we move on to our second public comment. Please come forward. If you wish to comment on an agenda item, speakers have 3 minutes. Okay. Thank you. Please give us your name. You have 3 minutes to provide your comments.

Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by adding Chapter 8.101, relating to tenant harassment; declaring the urgency thereof; and declaring that this ordinance shall take effect immediately, read and adopted as read. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_11172020_20-1053

However you'd like to take them there. Okay, so let's do 73, which is the second reading, and then we'll do the modification in order. So. Item 73. Can we do that one, please? Recommendation to declare an ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code relating to tenant harassment, declaring the urgency thereof, and declaring that this ordinance shall take effect immediately. Read and adopted as read. I have a motion going to get a second to the motion in a second. Is there any public comment on 73? Yes. Our first speaker is Tiffany Davey. Good evening. Tiffany and I are going to shoot this very short. I submit this item with no amendment. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Hollis Stewart. Hello counseling there. I am speaking and I am 67 here. I do want to work 73 so I can. Oh, okay. I'm on that second thing of this. I am in favor of the ordinance to protect tenants. I don't want to see a weakened because I think that at this particular time in our city, with COVID and with so many other problems, we have got to make sure that people have a place to live. And to be putting people out would be a terrible thing for our city. I live downtown. I see many homeless people sleeping analogies under the rug underneath them, just any kind of thing. So let's keep this thing so we can stop harassment, so we can make sure people are safe. Okay. So thank you very much for your time. It's good to keep this and make it good and take care of our all of our citizens. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Lianna Noble. Vienna, Nobel. Our next speaker is Jordan Wynn. This is Lana. I live downtown. I'm. Go ahead. The end of over. Okay. Thank you. Smartphones are difficult with this process. Our access is an ongoing adventure. I guess I am in strong favor of the anti harassment ordinance to protect tenants. I hope that the Council is aware of the fact that in order to protect their rights, including with this particular ordinance, tenants are forced to go to court. And it is important that we have an ordinance that has language that is clear and does not allow for a loophole. All of the language in this current ordinance is very clear, and we do not want, as residents here, to have it watered down or made difficult for the tenants to then exercise their rights when they have to go to court. We are an 80% tenant neighborhood downtown and most of the surrounding neighborhoods are way more than majority tenants. We desperately need our neighbors to have this protection against harassment. We need. To. Keep our neighborhoods as stable. As. Possible. Thank you. Our next speaker is Jordan Wynn. Hi, this is Jordan win with District two. I also feel director for everyone in Long Beach. I'm speaking in strong support of the Tenant Anti Harassment Ordinance as it was passed on November 2nd. I don't think the city should be making any amendments to this at this particular time. This is important legislation that we've been working for months on and that need in order to not be illegally retaliated against or affected or harassed by landlords that continue to pursue that. Let's be clear here. This is mostly bad actor corporate landlords that are doing this in our neighborhoods. And this is exactly what the policy is meant to certify in the first place. All of these actors are already acting in bad faith that is assumed. Don't make it more legally difficult for tenants to assert their rights and pass item 73 as is. Thank you. I yield the rest of my time. Thank you. Our next speakers, Andrew Mann to honor. Hello. My name is Angela, the one to a community organizer with lobbies forward. Over this past year, countless constituents of yours have demonstrated their resiliency and built tenant power across the city. They've shown up to action to demand tenants rights. They've made public comments and ultimately want to keep their families safe from displacement. This ordinance is more than just a policy change. It is a testament to the countless hours they put in to protect their families. The Andrews You chose to champion this policy and with that you chose to defend it in its purest form. This bad faith language is an undermining of communities hard fight to protect their families and is just meant to provide slumlords with coverage. And like you said, if you're a good landlord, nothing to worry about. You've known these tenants for years. You've broken bread with them, you've watched their kids grow, and those very same children are the ones up at night. You said something to me that's been sticking. The system is called, you've experienced it yourself, and now you must prevent it from happening to others or council members or agendas in the renaming of civic school sports facility in your name so that your legacy lives on. And I hope they aren't holding the vote on item 75 against you. Rest assured the community knows you and will ensure your legacy lives on. But No. 175 and don't allow any changes to the anti-harassment ordinance. Lastly, Mr. Mayor, you said we want to be a city that supports all types of housing. Let's also support the tenants who live in the. Thank you. Our next speaker is also tongue. Honorable Mayor and city council members. Hi, my name is Alpha Tung, District seven, resident and member of the Long Beach Housing Justice Coalition. In solidarity with Long Beach's renter majority who deserve dignity, safety and health, especially during the raging pandemic, we thank you for adopting the Tenant Anti-Harassment Urgency Ordinance on November 2nd and urge you to keep it as is with no amendments. Council Members. This is not a controversial issue. If you are a good landlord, this ordinance does not apply to you. If you are a kind landlord, this ordinance does not apply to you. If you are a landlord who treats your tenants with basic decency and respect, this ordinance does not apply to you. So to the good, kind, decent landlords, in the words of Bobby McFerrin. Don't worry, be happy. This ordinance only applies to bad actor landlords who abuse their power to abuse their tenants. City Council has the responsibility to legislate against abuse. Council members preserve the ordinance as adopted on November 2nd and reject any amendments like item 75 to weaken this ordinance by adding the words bad faith, which puts an impossible burden of proof on tenants and effectively erases the adopted protections from landlord abuse. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Melody Ozuna. Mayor, members of the City Council. My name is Melody Osuna. I am a homeowner in the eighth District. I'm also an attorney with the Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles, Long Beach. I run a medical legal partnership at a county run medical facility in District one, which means I provide free legal assistance to low income tenants here . Long Beach. I am thankful to the Council for passing this anti-harassment ordinance for recognizing that we are in unprecedented times. Adding a blanket bad faith requirement would ruin the protections you provided your residents. You took an important step and what was needed for the tenants in our city to be free from harassment. I also want you to recognize that it's ordinances like this that bring race equity to Long Beach. As we continue into month nine of the pandemic. Study after study show that people of color are the hardest hit by COVID 19, both in health and economic impacts. When working with medical patients here in Long Beach, I hear story after story about how stressful it is when a landlord threatens them. One of the biggest issues I see now is landlords using their power to misrepresent the law to tenants. They provide false information in documents requiring tenants to sign contracts not needed for the legal protections provided by the Long Bay, Long Beach, the county and the state for tenants who are scared of losing their housing but have no control over their economic situation during this pandemic. They're forced into a bad situation. As their attorney, I can now affirmatively, affirmatively enforce their rights. A blanket ban would be. Thank you. Our next speaker is Natalie Diaz. Mr. Mayor. Members of the council. My name's Natalie Diaz, and I'm a tenant in the third district and a nonprofit attorney. I'm urging the council to keep the ordinance as is written. As a nonprofit attorney, I've seen firsthand how important strong protections are for tenants. This ordinance, as it's written now, is especially important because it doesn't force tenants to prove that their landlord acted in bad faith, which is impossible to do. I understand that there's another item on today's agenda, item 75, which moves out of bad faith requirement and the ordinance, which is absurd. How would a tenant prove what is going on in the mind of their landlord when they are harassing them? This is actually something that you believe a tenant can do. This is an impossible requirement. This anti tenant harassment ordinance was meant to protect vulnerable people during an unprecedented pandemic where black and brown communities have been disproportionately impacted . I know that at this point my 90 seconds and comment is probably not going to sway the council members that are truly against this anti tenant harassment ordinance. All I hope that the council members hear that this ordinance is important, should be left there as is. And changing it to bad faith means that protecting vulnerable communities in Long Beach in the midst of a pandemic is just not something that is. Valued that. You think. Thank you. And give us a moment while we transition to the Spanish portion of public comment. Our first speakers are Velasco. Is the translator online. See our first pictures are of Alaska. Senora Aura Velasco documentary about power. I see. It's $1,000,000,000 festival claiming the lack of control and global. The most fun was this kind of weather. You know, you're so lucky you're in the neighborhood. What a normal life has been facing. Okay. So I'm asking to approve the ordinance as it was presented, and I ask you to please vote no on 75. Hello. Think of oh, hockey. Okay. Grasses. Okay. That was my comment. Thank you. That's just. Thank you. Our next speaker is Ariella Quintana Ortega. Si Senora Aurelio Quintana. Sympathetic Documentary. Supplementary Power. Emma. Good to see you. Good to see. All of you know, when a father would say, how is the ego so that that your. Let's be look at the dramatic get a good idea what it looks like to keep us out of Natal in November. Look at the end of the. You might get a lot of support of that. You get a business. You can work in. Well know that they think of. Get the hang of it just feeling miserable. But they have a sore throat. They cannot seem to get. Well, you know. I would promote them and say good on someone. Hi, my name is Aurelia Quintana. First of all, I just want to say thank you, thank you for the r for approving the ordinance. And like I said, I want to thank everyone. I thank you for approving number 75. And I would like to ask you to leave it as is and so that we can be protected. Alabamans quickly agree garcinia. If the. I must say, most of the people, for the most part, are not. I. With the hands of Assad. The bodies of. It's common to see Musketeer on General Mills. I also. Yeah. We want to be protected when we are harassed by the rent, by the renters. I'm sorry about the owners of their properties. It feels as if they want to humiliate us. And that is not fair. Whoo hoo! Erato Look at us. Well, let me see if I walk away. And I think Mr. Campbell will forget none of the lessons, which I can say. Yes. Well, for wages important for. Okay? Yes. I just want to live it as is. Honestly, it's not a good situation when the way they treat us. And it's not only my situation, but a lot of people are in the same situation. They saw as a. Yes a letter penalty imposed on your gracious. Of. Okay, good offense, which is aggressive. That's all. Thank you, everyone. Thank you. Our next speaker is Maribel Marin, Mary Ellis. He went through. This is number one ridiculous season. You know, this documentary about power. If the government is not going to help you, Andrew Kemp can get a laugh out of things like this. Well, good then. And we'll go to a coastal city. Improve your life a lot worse. Improve your visa is enough to send some city back. This is some of the concerns, of course. Want to see more rain, that there's something that's in place that he can not carry on communicating. The political landscape. You're going to. See. You know, I think. Yes. Okay. Nina, this is for council member Andrew. I just want to ask you to don change anything to article 73. I can talk from personal experience. We are constantly harassed or water and or gas is turned off without prior notice. If you modify it, it's something that will affect us in a negative way and also don't make any changes. 25. Album. I said, You know what I thought? Well. My. That was it. Thank you. Our next speaker is Porfirio de la Rosa. Susan, your principal has said it's a commentary about power. Why not. See the supplementary. Premium over popular offer? You're looking at lots of current deals. DC Avenue is looking at a few more vehicles that are looking for you for care and those of us with an LA. Hello in Burma. Sorry, I never thought I get this done. We will rebuild the family in which a lot of people care. What them. All of it that they think single. They c us. But it was a mistake. They think of. Okay when you interpret that. People. Hi, my name is Poppy de la la Rosa. I would like to ask you to leave the ordinance as is. We are constantly harassed. Trash is thrown near our windows. This has caused a roach infestation. I would like you to vote no on number 75 and leave. Leave it as it is. Album. I said, You're right. I thought. This is it. The mink is the bouquet that you're gonna throw. How to give this a girl, a little fella, you know, by a lawyer that is brought up all our security there. But if you look at them, it'll be like of taken. Images of the animal character forever migrated from the opera before. Grass is ahead of them. Yes. Also, they are constantly coming. They're doing the work. They turn up the water. They turn up the electricity work prior notice. They throw their trash or their dirty water. And this has caused an infestation. Thank you for listening. And I would like you to just leave number 75, as is. Thank you. Our next speaker is Rosa VILLASENOR. Senora Rosa. Zero seven U.S.A.. C.S. Lewis and the commentary apocalypse. When an artist's concept is also. Yes. And your your outlook. But what if I work and I'll see you end up with all. Well no in love with them, I think in the other things, I think. But if you set it up also, I think, you know, I mean, they come in. So if they have also some impact on the pandemia embedded on this. Is this what media? Isn't war beyond war? Both and no. Know it's up in the. Maybe, but I could comment that I didn't have all this. Of course, I didn't get that honest with much of the appointed. But only if they both get out of it. You see, if you. I. Then you're gonna see. I knew that. I think. Grass doesn't get interpreted. Hi. My name is Rosa. Um, I would like to say, first of all night council members and Mayor, I would like to ask you to please vote no on Amendment 75 to avoid harassment. It all started with the pandemic. It has been an agony. Council Member Andrew, please vote no. They took the doors away. They turned off the lights for eight days on the street. There's a lot of homeless. Please, Mayor, please help us. Please vote no on 73 and 75. That is. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Silvia de la Rosa. Senora Silvia dela rosa. Thing when I started you the la rosa senora regarding equal time is better for five or. Get Egan Mulligan, Lester Barela, Cosmo Ebert and Lasseter, Julianne Moore, Murray Campbell, any potential? Gwendolyn, you really concern me. Equal man all together. Yummy. Yuck. I'm Lucas Murray. Sequel Acusado. Beetle, but they're more alike than they think of you. GRASSLEY Senator, good afternoon. My name is Sylvia La Rosa. Mr. Mayor, council members, I would like to ask you to please vote no on 75. I am a mother and I cannot tell you how frustrated I feel. When. My son and I are harassed. There is nothing that I can do. So please, I ask you to vote no. Getty Aggregate albums, signora or anything that was said. Thank you. Thank you. That concludes public comment for this item. Thank you. We we have a motion us again. I was going to do a roll call. Mayor, can you please share who the motion in the second. Motion by Councilmember Ringa and a second by Councilmember Pearce. Thank you. District one I. District two. I. District three. I. District four. I. District five. I. District six and District seven. By District eight. I. District nine. All right. Ocean carries.

A bill for an ordinance concerning designated consumption area setback requirements. Designated consumption areas will be permitted to operate at least 1000 feet from of a school, 500 feet of a Child Care Establishment, 500 feet of a alcohol or drug treatment facility; 500 feet of a city-owned recreation center or city-owned outdoor pool. Council member Black approved direct filing this item on 4-11-19.

DenverCityCouncil_04222019_19-0349

No items have been called out. Miss anything. All right, ma'am. Secretary, will you please put the first item on our screens? And, Councilwoman Sussman, will you please put Council Bill 349 on the floor? Certainly. I move that council bill 19 dash 0349 be placed upon final consideration and do pass. It has been moved. Can I get a second? It has been moved and seconded questions and comments by members of Council Council in Black. Thank you, Mr. President. I'm sorry to take time away from tonight's very important meeting, but an incredible amount of energy has gone into this extremely modest compromise, and it's been quite an experience. I'm not even sure how the vote will go tonight, especially with certain absences, but I've got quite a few things I'd like to say about it. I've been asked why I even bother to work on this issue, and there are four reasons. The first reason is the voters. I feel like there's a disconnect with our voters. Millennials are Denver's largest demographic group. I think we've seen that in our recent elections and they overwhelming whelming support this industry. Denver voters have approved multiple marijuana measures, both locally and at the state level. Amendment 64 passed in a landslide with two thirds of the Denver voters in support, with some of the highest support in District one and District ten. In November of 2016 over Denver, voters approved the neighborhood supported social consumption pilot program. And we need. To honor that. The second reason I've worked on this is kids. The purpose of this initiative was to protect kids from seeing and smelling consumption in parks, on sidewalks, the 16th Street Mall and along our rivers. There are multiple protections in place to protect kids in neighborhoods, including the fact that neighborhood support is needed, which will greatly restrict what neighborhoods are available, and give communities power additional protections for kids and neighborhoods, including a required public hearing. The fact that consumption cannot be visible from the outside, unlike a bar and signage, cannot indicate that there is consumption going on inside. All of these things protect kids. I'm really perplexed by people who are opposing this in the name of kids. It seems to me that they would be in support of concealing consumption from kids by opposing it. Are they saying that they're okay with people smoking pot in our parks? I find that completely illogical. I'm also perplexed why, in the name of protecting kids, we don't hear from the same people about bars being next to schools or our general acceptance and celebration of alcohol, which is a far more widespread and dangerous product, especially for kids. I have the feeling that most of the people opposed are actually marijuana prohibitionists who still oppose legalization and Amendment 64. So they come out in force to oppose all things marijuana, no matter how impractical. The third reason I've continued to work on this is business fairness. This industry is far more regulated, restricted and taxed than any other industry. We collect a lot of tax revenue, which we all welcome. This council voted unanimously to increase the marijuana sales tax to fund affordable housing, and I presume we all hope that those revenues will go up. It seems contrary to me that we heavily taxed the industry. We welcome sales to tourists, but we won't give them a legal place to consume. The fourth reason I pursued this is the process. There was a four part process. The first part was when voters approved the law. The second part was excise and license. After their advisory committee, they added restrictions over the objections of many, including the proponents, who believe that the setbacks are frustrating the intent of the voter approved initiative. The task force unanimously agreed that the distance requirements were preventing prospective businesses from finding a viable and available location, and the task force recommended either eliminating the added setbacks or creating an exemption. After six committee meetings, council members were not supportive of the task force recommendation, but there was support for this very modest compromise to reduce the added setbacks to 500 feet while maintaining the 1000 foot setback from schools. For those council members who are wanting to wait until the state hospitality law passes. I do hope you understand that the state law includes a business model exactly like the one that Denver's voters approved. The state law will not provide any guidance on how Denver should regulate, nor does it create setbacks. The state law does provide another business model allowing consumption in stores. So for those council members who are opposed because they don't like this voter approved business model, I wonder if you'll be leading the charge for the city to adopt consumption in some of our over 250 stores across the city. And with that, a reminder that this proposal is more restrictive than the federal drug free zone law. The intent of the voter approved initiative was to protect communities and children from seeing and spelling public consumption, and that by reducing the added setbacks with this modest compromise, some businesses will have the opportunity to find a location and provide that out of public view opportunity for our taxpaying consumers. I hope you will consider supporting this. Thank you, Councilwoman Black. Councilwoman Sussman. Was it councilman before that? You were next. Okay. Thank you very. Much. I was able to serve on the task force for this particular ordinance. And yes, it was the general consensus of the task force that there were restrictions that thwarted the will of the voters. And the outcome has made it evident since there are only two social consumption businesses in the city. The task force was made up of many voices on both all sides of the perspective. Then importantly, the neighborhood representatives agreed that the distance requirements were too restrictive, most significantly because they continued the concentration of marijuana businesses in minority and low income neighborhoods. One needs merely to look at the maps to see how it is perpetuated by the thousand foot restrictions. There are also many other restrictions that were not part of the ballot issue. I think that the the task force was made up of many folks thinking about what we should do, and particularly for the safety of children, certainly was top of our mind. Reminded me a little bit about the short term rentals where we worked on it forever, but we also established an advisory group for short term rentals so that they could sort of follow as the ordinance goes, pass and tweak it as we go along, which we have with short term rentals, and perhaps we might be able to do something like that if this ordinance passed. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Sussman. Councilwoman Cannick. Thank you, Mr. President. I just made an extensive comments last week, so I will reference those about the evidence in terms of marijuana. Risk is mostly determined by, for younger kids, their home environment, their level of parental contact, and their level of involvement in activities. And for older children, the biggest determinant to deter kids is based on their peer group as well as that parental involvement again. So there is really strong evidence on how to deter children from marijuana use, and none of it has to do with the distance by which something is inside of a building from them. But so I will reference all of that from last week. But I just have one question for our legislative counsel, if I may, Ms.. Crawford, if you could answer for me. So if this ordinance does not pass tonight, so the ordinance stays as it was passed by voters, and then the rules that were passed by excise and license are challenged based on the fact that they may not be within the authority of the voters. In terms of, you know, if a court were to decide that, what would be the result if those rules were struck down? What would the distance requirements be if the if the rules were struck down by a court? Kirsten Crawford Legislative Council. So the question you present is, you know, analyzing a litigation claim. And I think, you know, certainly there could be a viable claim that was brought that talks about the rules, frustrating the intent of the initiative. But the outcome is up in the air and we don't know what a court would do. And we don't know at this point what what the evidence would show in a court's mind. But I guess the the underlying question that you're also asking is how would someone frame a claim more so if if the rules were struck down, would there be any distance requirement from day care centers, from pools if those rules were found to not be in compliance and they were struck down? The reason it's a it's a complicated question, and it is something that I can't step in the shoes of the court and determine where they would go, whether they would determine whether they have the authority to permanently enjoying the city from from enforcing the rules. I suppose that could happen. Okay. Let's let's do the question in reverse then. So my I would posit that we're at risk we are at risk of the rules being struck down altogether, which would mean the only distance requirement would be schools. You're not you don't want to weigh in on the odds of that. And I understand, but it's a possibility if we pass this ordinance tonight. Then what we have, the ordinance will have distance requirements in it and the rulemaking process becomes. Yeah that that's right. I think there is at least an argument from, from your perspective that you're actually codifying this in an ordinance and then the distance requirements are something that only could be changed by council. Okay. Thank you. I just I wanted to clarify that and I realize I didn't do a very good job framing my questions. Right now, we have some debate about whether the department had the authority to pass the rules they passed or not. If you really like distance requirements, putting 500 foot distance requirements in the ordinance is much safer than having there be no distance requirements in the ordinance for anything other than schools and taking your chances with whether they're challenged and whether they're struck down. So that's the point I would offer to colleagues who really want to see some 500 foot who really want to see distance from daycare centers, pools and these other things. This is putting them in the ordinance where they can't be challenged, as you know, beyond the scope of the rulemaking authority. So that that's my poorly tortured legal question point. Thank you very much. Thank you. Councilwoman. Can each Councilman Espinosa. Along that same line of thinking to our attorney. How vulnerable would we be to such a such litigation if from this day, as we just acknowledged prior to this vote, that there are ample opportunities in communities of color and and lower income neighborhoods, because what then it's saying is that these social consumption opportunities, the industry doesn't want to build social consumption opportunities where they have no problem growing their product and that they only want to do that in more affluent communities. That would be sort of opened up by virtue of a vote. So, I mean, you can't at one time say there are opportunities that are just not where these businesses want to locate and at the same time say we're not granting the opportunity for social consumption was you know, so is a vote to not decrease the limitations really make us susceptible to any sort of litigation on that front. Kirsten Crawford Legislative Council. It's a similar question posed a different way, but I think there's not any way for me to determine what a court would do if a claim was was brought about frustration. I think a court would look to the evidence and try to determine what are the reasons that that the businesses are not finding locations. I do think to a point that Councilwoman Canete made in our at the time of the hearing that the rules talk about excise and licensing, having the authority to administer and enforce, and that perhaps this goes beyond that. But there's just no way for me to guess what a court might do. And would that be a 1 to 6 action should those actions have been made within 30 days of that rulemaking or. No, no, not likely. You might see it in the form of just a complaint or a declaratory judgment. Right. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Espinosa. Councilman Lopez. Thank you. Actually, my question was addressed in the last line of questioning. So thank you. All right. I don't see anybody else in the queue. All right. Well, before we vote, I'll just end by saying, first of all, thank you to Councilwoman Black. We had a lot of task force meetings. We had a lot of committee meetings. We had a long meeting last time. And here we are again. So thank you for doing this, especially because it was called out in the ordinance that this was a part of the function of what we do, you know, as serving on the task force and being personally someone who did not vote for this ordinance when it first passed. I you know, I am a little surprised that we're here struggling to even do this, because this was, I think, a very conservative attempt at a compromise to something where there is one business license. The voters voted and said, we as the citizens of Denver want this. And the system that we have has has led to only one. Maybe you could argue two, although that one quickly went out of business for now, I guess two licenses. And so I think that it is incumbent upon us, no matter whether we supported this or not in the beginning, to try to live up to the voter's intent as best we can. And I think that what the task force pushed for was an even more aggressive approach to open that door. And I think where we landed was about the most conservative approach that you could take the one next small step to see if that door opens. And I'm not sure that even by opening that door, we would end up with, you know, more than a handful of licenses citywide as compared to what we have for consumption of alcohol. So I thank you for for sticking with this and for bringing it forward. I will be supporting this. I hope that my colleagues will support it. And we can take that one step towards seeing if that makes a difference in honoring the voter's intent. So councilmembers, a quick reminder that any referred ordinance adopted by a vote of the people may be amended or repealed by city council only by a two thirds vote. So nine affirmative votes instead of the standard seven affirmative votes. Our counts of council are required to pass this bill this evening. Madam Secretary, roll call. Black eye. Brooks. Espinosa No. Flynn No. Gilmore No. Herndon No. Cashman I. Can. Lopez I. Knew. No. Ortega Sorry. Sussman. I. Mr. President. Hi, Madam Secretary. Please. Because voting in those results. Seven, nine, five nays. Seven ays, five nays, custom bill 349 has failed. That concludes the items to be called out this evening. All bills for introduction are ordered published and we are now ready for the block vote on resolutions and bills on final consideration. Council members remember that this is a consent or block vote and you will need to vote. Otherwise, this is your last chance to call out an item for a separate vote. Councilwoman Sussman, will you please put the proclamation resolutions and for adoption and the bill on final consideration for final passage on the floor? Yes, Mr. President. I move that proclamations and resolutions be adopted and bills on final consideration be placed upon final consideration, and do pass in a block for the following items. Numbered zero 4 to 1 334327332333209330212299306307. And that looks like it. Thank you, Councilwoman Sussman. It has been moved and seconded. Madam Secretary, roll call. Black. Hi, Brooks. Hi. Espinosa. Hi. Flynn, I. Gilmore. I Herndon. I Cashman. Hi. Can each find Lopez. Hi, New Sussman. Hi, Mr. President. Hi, Madam Secretary. Please call the voting announced results. 1212. Eyes. The resolutions have been adopted and bills have been placed upon final consideration and do pass. Tonight there will be a combined public hearing on Council Bill 302 approving and accepting Comprehensive Plan 2040 and Council Bill 303 Approving and accepting Blueprint Denver.

A bill for an ordinance making supplemental appropriations from the General Contingency Fund to Departments and to the Business Incentive Fund and Technology Service Capital Fund; and authorizing a supplemental appropriation and the procurement of leased golf carts from the Golf Enterprise Fund. (FINANCE & SERVICES) Approves 2014 supplemental requests for the General Fund and Golf Enterprise Fund. The Committee approved filing this bill at its meeting on 11-4-14.

DenverCityCouncil_11172014_14-0961

Certainly. I move that council bill 961 series 2014 be ordered published. It has been moved we need a second has been moved in second it comments from members of Council Councilwoman thoughts. Thank you, Mr. President. This is an ordinance that's the supplemental appropriation for 2014. The Finance Department, City Finance Department has chosen to lump together supplemental appropriations for several different purposes. The largest one for more than $1.3 million out of the general fund contingency is my main concern. The administration wants this money to be used for incentives for a specific business. Interestingly, they cite confidentiality so that we can't be told at this point what the business is. Well, I don't like making special deals for special businesses. Regardless, I'm not at all willing to do a, trust me, transfer to a business incentive fund I detest for a business that can't be named, so due diligence can't be performed. Keep in mind, even after we do learn the name, if we didn't like the company, the money will still be in this corporate welfare fund. We have many city basic services I'd prefer to use the money for or give overall tax relief to all businesses. So there's a level playing field. Well, I'm not objecting to other items in the supplemental. I'll need to vote no to register my objection to the business incentive fund transfer. Thank you. Councilman Fox, Councilman Canete. Thank you, Mr. President. We did have this supplemental in the Finance Committee and Councilwoman Fox touched on this very briefly in her comments. But we do, as a council, have an opportunity once there is a negotiation that's complete between the city and this party and there is some form of a contract or agreement, the final contract to disperse these funds would require council approval. I share that because I actually share Councilman Fox's skepticism about business incentives. For me, the issue is, are we investing in good jobs? Are we investing in, you know, livable wages and the kinds of jobs that are really going to help our citizens be good able to afford our city residents ? But I agree that that scrutiny is really important, and I am comforted by the fact that we will have a vote if and when this this company comes to agreement with the city. I respect Councilwoman Fox's decision to say no upfront, but I remind my colleagues that we'll have a second chance. And it is it's unusual to be asked to do this without knowing the company, but. But having a second chance before the dollars are spent is is why I feel comfortable voting yes tonight and encourage my colleagues to do the same. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman. Any other comments from members of council? And I will I will I will come as well. I second Councilman Kasich's comments and I share Councilman Fox's concerns so that having the legislative branch make an approval based off of just trusting the good will certainly not to imply anything counter of the administration, but we have the responsibility to do due diligence as well. So knowing that this will have to come back to council for approval gives me comfort in knowing that we will address that in due time. Mr. Secretary, we are now 961 to be ordered publish roll call please thoughts no can each layman Lopez. Right. Montero, I never i. Shepherd I. Brooks Brown, I. Mr. President. Hi, Mr. Secretary. Please close the voting and now the results. 99199912 961 has been ordered published. The last bill for introduction, I believe was 930. Leader was called out by Councilman Nevitt and will technology will catch up it was councilman that.

A bill for an ordinance designating certain properties as being required for public use and authorizing use and acquisition thereof by negotiation or through condemnation proceedings of fee simple, easement and other interests, including any rights and interests related or appurtenant to properties designated as needed for the Sand Creek Project. Grants the authority to acquire through negotiated purchase or condemnation any property interest as needed in support the Sand Creek Project, including easement interests, access rights, improvements, buildings, fixtures, licenses, permits and other appurtenances, for the portion of the vacated North Ulster Street right of way located at 8101 E. 40th Avenue in Council District 8. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 12-15-20.

DenverCityCouncil_01042021_20-1534

All right. Thank you, Councilman. And thank you, Kristen, for joining us tonight. The next item up is Council Bill 20, Dash 1534. Councilmember Herndon, will you please put council bill 20, Dash 1534 on the floor for publication? Yes, Madam President. I move the council bill to 0-153 for be ordered published. Okay. Thank you. It has been moved and seconded by Councilman Hines. Questions or comments by members of council. Council members say the. Thank you, Madam President. I am curious about how this one is different than the eminent domain authorization that we passed in July and discussed at length for the Sand Creek Project. Is Lisa Lumley able to or somebody from real estate able to explain the difference between this eminent domain authorization? Evening Council. Councilwoman. Yes. So what, you approved the the larger land acquisition ordinance back at the end of July. As we were moving through the process with our appraisals, what we realized is there was an error in the legal description. And the error is that as we had started this project a couple of years ago, it overlapped with the vacation of Ulster, which runs adjacent to this property. And so this land acquisition ordinance is a cleanup, if you will, that will include the approximately 15 feet that runs alongside this property. It would it completes the trail. Otherwise, it would leave a gap in the trail, but it also would create a weird leftover remnant for the landowner right now, because it means that we would be the Ulster is the westernmost part of his parcel. And then what you did approve is further east. And so this is the 15 foot gap. Thank you very much for that. And. Madam President, I would like a separate vote on this one. I did not support the the vote in July and would like to go on record as not supporting this second piece. All right. Perfect. Thank you, Councilwoman. Seen no other? I'm sorry, Councilman Hines. But thank you, Madam President. Just a quick comment. I did not support the original vote, but there's no need to leave an owner with 15 feet of space. So I will support this one. Thank you, Madam President. All right. Thank you, Councilman Hines. So, you know their hands raised. Madam Secretary, roll call, please. CDEBACA No. Clark. I. Flynn. I. Herndon. I. Hi. Hi. Cashman i. Kimmage. I. Ortega. I. Sandoval, I. Sawyer. I. Torres, I. Black eye. Madam President. I. Madam Secretary, close the voting and announce the results. When they 12 eyes. One day, 12 eyes council bill 20 dash 1534 has been ordered published. The next item up is Council Bill 20, Dash 1554 Councilwoman Sade Ibaka. Please go ahead with your questions on 20 Dash 1554. Thank you, Madam President. This one is a little bit confusing to me, and I just had some questions about if we're floating a check essentially for dollars we expect from HUD later in the year. And if it is, where is the five year action plan for the Community Development BLOCK grant dollars mentioned in the bill request? I couldn't find it in any emails or on the granicus posting or on on our Denver Gov website. And I know we spend CDBG dollars in multiple city departments. And so I'm just wondering where to find this information and what we're doing here. All right. Thank you, Councilwoman. I think Rachel Barden is going to take it first. I, I knew myself, but I think that I'm not sure if there's anyone from Dito who can speak specifically to the five year action plan and provide that to you. But that is they should have that available to send via email if it is not posted in granicus. To answer your question. Go ahead. Is it public on our Denver Gov website or will it be at any point? That is a good question and I don't know if our friends in are available at school. I think we have Matt. Khan's. Okay. Well, there you go. Yeah. Hi. Thank you. And I may call on Rachel King. She's on here and actually oversees our action plan. We do have an annual action plan. That is, it actually has either a five day or more public comment period. We usually do not do the annual action plan unless, one, there is a substantial amendment, substantial amendment to the action plan so that when we received the covered CDBG dollars, we had to do another public annual action plan with that. But usually the action plan is not sorry, it's not made public until March or so because we have to wait until we receive the actual dollars and the award that we're going to get from the federal government. And usually that number is not quantified and solidified until February or March. And then we will go to the public public comment period with that action plan every year. What you're referencing, I believe, Councilwoman, is when we mentioned the five year action plan for this dollar amount we were talking about annually, over the past five years, we've received between six and $7 million. And so we don't see that this two and a half million dollars. We were really talking from a risk perspective. We don't see advancing two and a half million dollars as being a substantial risk to the city, because every year for the past five years, we typically have received close to $7 million. And that's what what we are referencing when we talked about the five year sorry, the five year plan on that. But if Rachel Zane, I'm sure she can talk about the action plan a little bit more. Sorry, Rachel King with Dito. So just before Rachel respond to that. So if we haven't approved the plan on how to spend the dollars, what are we advancing the dollars for in this instance? Sure. So we run a January through December program here at DITO for our CDBG, HUD dollars and the action plan, which unfortunately is not really established until late Q1. Early Q2 covers January through December, but we also receive program income every year from our loan portfolio and we do have some carryover dollars some years. And so this money just really allows us, for example, the sofa that just went out on both host side and our No. $5 that we use in our Nest neighborhood team that was close to one and a half million dollars total. I believe that we typically need to front that money when we encumber that full amount. So if we have a $100,000 contract, we need to encumber that $100,000, which will last for the full year. But we don't typically even receive money from HUD until July, sometimes, sometimes later, sometimes earlier. So it really this advance really helps us cover some of those admin costs, some of the contracts that we typically do toward the end of the year to start on January 1st. Now we do have some carryover dollars. But but, you know, it doesn't always work out from a timing perspective. And sometimes we have a lot of money that might carryover and sometimes we have very little because of the power building acquisition and some other acquisitions that we did as well is because of the limited program income we've been receiving due to COVID. We have a loan deferral program and some other items where businesses just aren't able to pay off their loans as often and frequency frequently as they typically do. We just don't have as much carryover funds this year, so we're asking for the advancement of two and a half million to really help us cover the first six months . And will we get will we get some kind of report on what we spend the advance on and which departments spends because you guys spend out of post and correct. Correct. Yeah, it really we it really depends on the timing and what projects go forward. We also sometimes, as you mention, we might have, you know, programs in host and and coming out of Dito that we start the contracting process in as we need to have the money available but the project may or may not even exist or be finalized with the contract until later in the year. But we do need to make sure that we have some of those funds intact, especially on the construction lines or even the service ones that take a full year. So the two and a half million, I mean, I guess we could do a we typically don't from an advance standpoint, don't know exactly what projects that two and a half million covers because we pull the money together from multiple years or multiple, multiple items. Right. So if we if we have a large acquisition, we might use some of the two and a half million we might use some of the carryover money from the year before. We look at it more of a first in first out approach. But but we could easily, you know, start start to develop a report that, you know, if we have two and a half million dollars worth of projects in the first six months, likely those would be the ones that that this advance is covering. Got it. And thank you for that. And I, I just urge my colleagues to hear what was said and to acknowledge that, you know, the city is doing exactly what small businesses and nonprofits in the community have been asking the city to be able to do. It's very difficult to deliver on grants when you have to front the money or deliver on services when you have to front the money or where you have to wait until a prime gets paid. And so we're doing exactly what people are asking us to do. And I hope that in in fronting the money or floating this check, knowing that the money will come in later, that we extend that same courtesy to others as we go forward doing business. That's it for my questions. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilwoman CdeBaca. Next up, we have Councilwoman Ortega. Thank you, Madam President. Matt, I just wanted to ask if if you have known projects already identified either programs or projects that this money will be used for. If you could share that with us. And then can you just clarify that these moneys that were advancing are aligned with what is in the five year plan that was submitted to HUD for laying out what what we intend to do with these HUD dollars over the next five years. Yes, absolutely. On your second question for sure, we we do have the five year plan and we do have an annual action plan that we put forward every year. So we we do not fear from that plan unless there is a substantial change. And so typically that will take another action plan amendment, which requires another public comment period. So, so usually we do a single annual action plan and then and then work on that five year plan as well. So we do not anticipate that these two and a half million dollars being advanced would veer outside, that they can't veer outside of what we what we would typically fund in our CDBG action plan unless we were to amend that plan. So with these dollars, what percentage is going to housing and homeless services versus the the desire for jobs and job creation? So, so so it varies year over year, but typically we have an agreement with hosts when they split off, we have an agreement with hosts that they will receive at least 30% of the total funding. And usually even before hosts split off, it was around a third, a third, a third. If you think of it from a nest perspective and public service perspective, a housing perspective and business development perspective. We tried to we tried to stay within that realm. So we have an agreement to keep at least 30% in host. But as payoffs and other loans pay down and pay off, if there are any outside payoffs that occur and we receive large amounts of money, that's when our executive directors of each agency will get together and determine the best need for for that additional funding that we can anticipate. Does. Does this include home and hopper or is that sort of set aside separate as separate? So Home Hub, ESG, a few others common hardware specifically are HUD, but they are 100% host. Dito does in fact, doesn't receive those dollars. And the ESG goes to them as well, right? Correct. Even though I don't believe that Rachel would have to correct me, I don't believe that's a hide. Maybe it is. Sorry, I'm not an expert on ESG. It is. It's. I used to go through human services now. Understood. Host Okay. That's all I have. It would be helpful to know where we can see the one year plan as well, not just the five year plan. I thought at one point we were you guys were providing that to us on a regular basis. And you may be because I'm on the committee that that goes to. So I don't remember seeing the one year plan come before us. And we can do that. If Rachel King is on, she can raise her hand and jump on. We did because we received this CDBG COVID. She received two rounds of it very recently. Just a couple of months ago, we did another public comment period for our action plan because as I mentioned, because we received the additional COVID money, it was considered an amendment to that action plan. And so we did redo our due action plan pretty recently. Rachel, I see that you're on. And it's thank you. And I just want to ask quickly if this also includes like a bunch of the the contracts or the the funding that has been brought before City Council on the shelters and some of those other services. The security, I know it has included the shower, some of the food. Those kinds of things. Is that all part of the dollars that you got from from HUD as well? Or some of it is, but most of it is not. My understanding with the host budget is they are primarily utilizing the FEMA and coronavirus relief dollars. First. As priority and then moving into their allocations. Of the HUD. Coronavirus dollars. Our 2020 action plan that we just amended, as Matthew indicated for the third time this year in 2020, does include all of the housing uses of. Those coronavirus dollars from HUD. But for our 2021 action plan, which is what these CDBG dollars will be covering. We have not gotten into the action plan. Process. Quite yet for that, but we are getting ready to start that at the end of January. Okay. And then if you could just send us a link to where we could see that one year plan, that would be really helpful. Definitely. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Councilman Ortega. Madam President. Thank you, Councilwoman. And thank you, Matt and Rachel, for fielding those questions. The next item up is Council Bill 20, Dash 1553. Councilman Hampton, will you please put Council Bill 20, Dash 1553 on the floor for final passage?

Recommendation to request City Manager to begin implementation on priority areas identified in the Downtown Parking Study and report on the progress of those initiatives.

LongBeachCC_04162019_19-0352

Item 11, please. You write that. We did item 11, item ten Communication from Council Member Pearce Recommendation to request city manager to begin implementation on priority areas identified in the downtown parking study and report on the progress of those initiatives. Thank you. Good. Okay. This is an item that we've worked on with staff, with Tom Modica and the team. And so I look forward to having you guys bring these back. My my priority out of all of these would be the parking impacted areas. Looking at the parking zone. I know my brain is not working. Maybe it is late, huh? Give me 1/2. I just been district. Yes, thank you. The parking assessment district. How soon do you think we could initiate that? Ask Linda Tatum to talk to that. Thank you. Councilwoman Pierce, we can get started on some of the preliminary research for that. But ultimately, in order to create a parking assessment district, we'd have to do some some studies to see how exactly what the fees could be to charge the property. So I'm going to say that would take several months to do that. But on some of the other items, and I understand that that's your priority, but some of the other items on that list that was in the staff report. We can certainly get started on some of those a lot quicker and come back sooner and concurrently. While we're taking a look at the the process and the potential fees for the property owners to create the parking and the process to create that parking assessment district. Okay. And the good news here, Councilmember, is there is some funding associated with this so that this is not one that's looking for new funds. $175,000. That does come as part of the successor agency. So as the properties are getting sold, that money goes to that account as per the settlement. So we'll be tapping into that as those funds become available. Great. The other one that I think would have a huge impact that seems like low hanging fruit that I'm curious on. The timeline is the private parking. I know that we've talked about different ways of doing this. And, you know, if you take the lot that's at fourth and cherry and it's got the one meter and people can pay to park there. I know that we have a list in my office of businesses that are willing to open up their lots. We just need a streamline process to do that. What's the timeline? You think we could have a city policy on on how to do that. On that process? We are coordinating with economic development. They've actually started that effort as well in terms of talking to some of the private property owners in the process to get those lots open up through those private property owners for for public parking. When they are, say, closed for the night. Those are some of the things that are currently in process. And I'd say the timeline would probably be within 60 days. 60 days. I love it, really. I just want to thank staff for their hard work. I know that this has been a long process and I know that we worked over a couple of months to get this. And so I really I know I pushed really hard to get it and then I didn't agenda it right away . So again, I think you there's this one area that I really appreciated your efforts on. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman Gonzales. Thank you so much. And I was forgotten on this item, just so you know. I'm just kidding. That's okay. As the other half of downtown, I just really want to thank Councilmember Pearce for bringing this forward as a supplement to the the study that we had already done. I know there's a lot of areas and gaps that we still need to fulfill and see where there's room to to succeed in parking. So thanks so much for bringing it forward. And thank you, Linda. Thank you. Public comment on this item, saying now there's a motion and a second, please cast your votes.

On the order referred on February 9, 2022, Docket #0264, that the appropriate committee of the Boston City Council hold a working session to review applications for the Commission on Black Men and Boys, the committee submitted a report recommending that the order ought to pass.

BostonCC_03162022_2022-0264

Thank you. 03790380 will be placed on file reports of committee. Mr. Clerk, please read docket 02640264. The Committee on Civil Rights and Immigrant Advancement, to which was referred on February 9th, 2022. Dr. Number 0264. Order that the appropriate committee of the Boston City Council hold a working session to review applications for the Commission on Black Men and Boys submits a report recommending that the order pass in the names of the 14 individuals listed in the report be submitted to Mayor. Thank you. The chip. That she recognizes council illusion. Chair of the Committee on Civil Rights and Immigration Council Lujan the chair of Committee. Council of Illusion. You have recognized. President. We're here to discuss docket 0 to 6 for the order to review applications for that commission on Black Men and Boys. Sponsored by Councilor Julian Mejia and Council President Ed Flynn. I was referred to the committee on February nine, 2022. I may, who is accepting 14 recommendations from the Boston City Council, of which seven will be approved and appointed to serve on the Commission on an ordinance creating the Commission on Black Men and Boys was initially codified last September. This year, the current ordinance was amended by adding provisions relating to executive director and defining the role of the Executive Director. And the Executive Director would be a member of the Commission ex-officio without additional compensation and would have a vote on a mat on matters before the Commission. In order to collaborate with the City Council, the mayor requested recommendations from us and will appoint seven members to the Commission from our 14 recommendations. And we establish an online application process where members of the public were encouraged to apply for to be one of the 14 nominees submitted to the Council. And the members of the Commission will serve a staggered two, three and four year terms. Councilors nominated two or three individuals when we held a hearing working session for consideration by the Mayor Council as we discussed the community involvement experience of the nominees. We also recognize the work of former District seven City Councilor Tito Jackson in getting this commission really off the ground, even when he was initially told no. He persisted on in council to express also support for our fellow city councilor colleague Brian Moore out to serve as a commission member. We emphasized the importance of participation and we also recognized that we wanted to ensure that members of the public had one of the 21 seats on the commission. And so it is our understanding that Brian Morrell, who had overwhelming support from city during the council process, will be included in the administration's selection process, which may also include being a member of the steering committee and being involved in other ways so as to ensure that members of the public will be able to have one of the seats and can be civically engaged in that way. So the passage of this order will prove the names of the following 14 individuals. A Submission to Mayor Woo. First Tito Jackson. Darrell Miller. James Hill. Dave Bazil. James Mackey. Jackson Killian. Justin Brown. Alex Edwards. Devin Morris. Curt Foulston. Kwame Edwards. Louis Elisa Ozark, Ohio. Ohio. Moby and Stephen Hinton. From these recommendations, Mary will appoint seven members to serve on the commission and submit this report, recommending that this order ought to pass. Thank you, Father Flynn. Thank you, counsel, again. Conclusion. The chair of the Committee on Civil Rights, Immigration of Advancement seeks acceptance of. The committee report named passage of docket 026 for. Before we do that I'd like to recognize council. Wirral Council. Well would you like to speak. Some of the. Okay. I apologize. I didn't see the identity on that. I do apologize. The light was not on, so I apologize it was. And then I turned it off because you went straight to the other side. So I figured I let you live a little bit, but I do appreciate you looking out for me. So thank you. So just want to say thank you to President Flynn and congratulations to council for sharing your first hearing and holding it down like she always does. I'm incredibly proud to be here today to vote in favor of the 14 black men that we have nominated to serve on the Commission for Black Men and Boys. Our nominees come from all different backgrounds sexual orientation, ages, lived experiences, and bring so much resources and life to this conversation. And while the mayor is slated to select seven of our 14 nominees, I think we can all agree that all 14 deserve to sit on the commission during the working session at all. We also came to the conclusion that our very own Councilor Morales is incredibly qualified to serve on the Commission, and we hope that the Mayor , I will make room for him so that the voice of black men from the council can be heard as well. I look forward to working with the commission, the commissioners, once they are sworn in, so that we can continue to uplift the voices and the lived experiences in our spaces. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman. Here at this time, the chair recognizes Councilor Bryant Wirral Council. You have the floor. Yes. Thank you, President Flynn. And thank you. Thank you, Councilor Louis, Jane and Carson here for your work and your leadership in establishing the Black Men and Boys Commission. And I just want to thank to all my colleagues for nominating me. I'm very honored and truly grateful to have the opportunity to serve on this historic commission here in the city of Boston that will advance black men and boys here in the city of Boston, and to ensure that our community are given the supports and to that they need to thrive. Thank you. Thank you, counsel. We're all. Would anyone else like to speak on this? Thank you. Counsel Evolution. Counsel Here. Thank you. Counsel Overall, and I'm so, so glad that Counsel World will play a key role on this commission. He has an incredible, important voice in this city. So thank you, counsel. We're all for the important work you do. Conclusion Chair of the Committee on Civil Rights Immigration Advancement seeks acceptance of the Committee report and passage of Docket 0264. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed say nay. The ayes have it. Docket docket 0264 has passed. Matters recently heard for possible action. Mr.. Please read Docket 0185 Police.

A RESOLUTION addressing a proposed liquefied natural gas facility in Tacoma, and urging the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency to improve tribal consultation procedures and collaborate with regional mayors, leaders, and tribes to address the growing impact of climate change.

SeattleCityCouncil_02262018_Res 31793

The Report of the Civic Development to Public Assets and Native Community Communities Committee. Agenda Item one Resolution 31783. Addressing a proposed financial gas facility in Tacoma and urging the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency to improve tribal consultation procedures and collaborate with regional mayors, leaders and tribes to address the growing impact of climate change. The committee recommends the resolution be adopted as amended. Very good. Just to sort of narrate how this should occur. I'll ask that councilmember were sort of introduce the base resolution and describe it and any details you'd like. And I know we have at least three amendments that I'm aware of, two proposed by councilmember, so wanted, one by Councilmember O'Brien. So we'll take those in that order. And having said that, councilmember words, the floor is yours. Thank you. First of all, President Harrell and colleagues, I'd like to thank Councilmember Miller, Councilmember Rideout, Councilmember Bain and Councilmember Bryant for attending today. And of course, Ramona Bennett, former chair of The Proud Nation, for being here. I really appreciate your words and your leadership. The resolution before us today is resolution 31793. It was discussed at full council on January 29th. At that meeting, the council decided that for the discussion of the resolution was needed, and yet it was referred to my committee Civic Development, Public Assets and Native Communities. Last Wednesday was historic. We had the Tribal Council on a government to government relationship and discussion here at the table. We unanimously move this resolution out of committee with recommendation for passage of full council today. Those present who voted yes were Councilmember Gonzalez, Councilmember Macheda, Councilmember Sawant, Councilmember O'Brien and myself. I'm very proud of the work that we did to bring it to get it passed unanimously. I want to thank again the tribal elected leaders that attended. That would be Councilmember Bryant. Councilmember Bean and Councilmember Rideout, not only who attended committee, but provided valuable comments in government government consultation regarding the concerns of the LNG plant, which they eloquently described, that those emissions going up and a would would affect the city of Seattle as well, that any toxics, any pollutants are not going to stay in Pierce County, but affect not only the people, the native folks of Salish, but all of those communities. We also discussed the makeup of the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency, in which there are, I believe, six or I'm sorry, three counties with nine tribes present in those counties in which more than a majority are truly tribes. I've worked very closely with the Puyallup Tribal Council and other tribal leaders, including from other tribes, who called me to tell me what they believe over the last several weeks to come to a consensus in agreement about government to government in this resolution and what it means. Ironically, I believe we're all in the same place. I understand that you would like the two amendments, but I also have to stay true to the spirit and the resolution I'm sorry, true to the Spirit and the discussions that I have had with my colleagues and other elected leaders, in order for this to move forward with the votes that we want to make it clear where the city of Seattle stands. I believe this is the best resolution true to the spirit of Pel tribe's resolution in response to the PSC LNG plant. This resolution pays respect to the tribe's sovereignty and urges the Puget Sound Clear Air Agency to improve its government to government tribal consultation procedures. And that is not just a nicety, but it's the federal law and treaties are the supreme law of the land. This resolution also urges the Clean Air Agency to collaborate with regional leaders to address the impacts of climate change and invest in clean energy that will reduce regional lines on fossil fuels. And again, I want to emphasize with climate change, the people that are most affected in disparately is Indian country and Indian people. Before I go any further, I want to make a few things clear from I was happy to hear and always happy to hear people coming to give public comment and offer their allyship and friendship in supporting the Puyallup tribe. This is a known non-binding resolution. It is not a law. We are not making a law today. We are taking a position on climate change. We've taken a position on government to government consultation. And we were taking a position that the tribes need a tribal consultation, and that's how we should all act moving forward. The tribe's resolution speaks the most powerful and is very eloquent and president. I'd like to read some of that into the record. It is attached to. The original resolution. But I think the chairman steroids words are very powerful. And what the tribal council passed on January 18th should be read into the record, if I may. Please proceed. Thank you. I'd also, before I state any more, as I share with all tribal leadership, it is safe to say this is not the end of this City Council's involvement with the Tribal Council and the LNG plant. This is just one step. We've had many discussions about how this city council is going to move forward in regards to our concerns regarding this plant. One of the most powerful things about the tribe is their way of becoming forward and speaking on behalf of their people. But the other people that non-citizens that live within their traditional land, the pale of tribe, said, be it resolved, a PRB tribe is strictly opposed to the Puget Sound Energies proposed LNG plant on the Tacoma Tide Flats, and the Puyallup Tribe has approved the attached statement as its official statement regarding the LNG plant being constructed by Puget Sound Energy. Make no mistake, the tribe's words are the most powerful and the most compelling not only for the city of Seattle, but all the cities that belong to the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency. The Tribe of Indians opposes the location of the liquefied natural gas storage facility because of its direct threat to their homeland culture, way of life and tribal members. The tribe makes five, very five major points that are both powerful, and it certainly reflects their sovereign status as leaders as they always have been in the Pacific Northwest. Indeed, if it weren't for the Puyallup Nation Squabbling Nation, we would not even have had the bold decision. The book that was held up earlier from the seventies, I actually read that when I was in college, part of the official record. What I like to include in here are the words of Councilor I'm sorry, President, the chair of the nation, the tribes of Indians is exercising its authority. As a sovereign nation. We are taking legal action against PSC, the city of Tacoma because they conducted the EIC process without consultation with the tribe. We are working with other tribes in our region to insist that federal, state and local officials ensure compliance with all permitting requirements. We are demanding that PSC cease construction activities until all tribal consultation and public participation requirements are met with all permit requirements are satisfied. We are demanding that the environmental impacts of the construction and operation of the PSC facility be adequately analyzed and that this information is released to the public. And finally, we call on the city of Tacoma and the Port of Tacoma to order a supplemental environmental health and safety review under the State Environmental Protection Act. I read these words into the record because, again, this is the most powerful document that we have. It is attached in part of the record for Seattle City Council's resolution today. And I just want to end on a more personal note that you will not find anyone who is like me, who was born and raised on the the tribe, grew up in the city of Tacoma, more committed to making sure that this plant doesn't go forward. But I have to respect the process of the Sale City Council and my colleagues. And I think it's fair to say that we have teed this issue up on a national level where you have a voice and we will continue to do that. And I want to thank those council members that have reached out to me more than once to talk to me and walk me through what issues were most important to them. I don't ever believe and I still don't sit here today thinking that this is about one council member versus another or one group is more important or any other or any movement did anything. I think what it comes down to for me as a native person is who has that treaty, right? The lamination stopped cherry the cherry point issue. It was a swing miss nation that stopped the oil trains. It would be the tribe that stops this plant. And that's why I believe in government to government consultation and respecting the sovereignty of a nation. And it doesn't mean that I don't believe and don't respect the activists, the environmentalists and the people that live in Tacoma. But I have to be cognizant of the construct in which I work, and that's an elected member of the Seattle City Council. So with that, I'll leave it and then I'll make a motion to move. Thank you. Can spin worse for your explanation of your very hard work on this. I'm aware and have been sort of properly served with amendments potential here. And so council members want to believe that the First Amendment you'd like to address. Thank you, President Harrell. I have two amendments that I will move and also have some general points that I will make when I talk about the First Amendment. But first I'll move and then I'll need a second. So I move amendment number one, which removes from a whereas clause Pierce's greenwashing language that falsely reads quote and data shows that LNG is one choice to fuel some ships and provide natural gas to residential and commercial customers to reduce sulfur emissions, harmful diesel particulate matter by 90%, nitric oxide and nitrogen dioxide emissions by 90%, and carbon dioxide emissions by 35% over that of diesel or bunker fuel. And court. So again, this amendment would remove that language from the whereas clause. I'll need a second. It's been looked. Amendment one striking out the language. The state about Councilman Swann has been properly moved. And second Councilmember Swann. Thank you, President. How is that? I wanted to start with a few general comments. First of all, want you pay my respect to the Duwamish, people whose land we are standing on, and my respects to all the tribal leaders and tribal representatives who have spoken not just today, but as they said last week, they've been speaking out on these issues not only for years and their own lives, but for generations. This has been an intergenerational fight against climate change and for the basic rights of our native communities and for all people. I wanted to thank particularly the Puyallup Tribal Council members, many of whom are here Councilmember David Bean, Annette, Brian, Sylvia miller and James Rideout, thank you so much for coming here. It has been our honor as the Seattle City Council has my personal honor as a council member and as a representative of working people of Seattle who recognizes that there really is no division and there should not be any division between ordinary people in Tacoma and ordinary people in Seattle . We stand together, and if that solidarity does not exist on an issue like climate change, then what issue cannot exist on because our fates are bound together. So I am so grateful. I'm also grateful to the many, many activists who have made made us come this far. I'm obviously not going to mention all the names, but Matt Rumley and Dakota Case, who actually met with my staff member, Ted Worden on November 30th of last year, who are the office? The involvement of my office started at that moment. And as I mentioned, you know, activists like urban activists like Madam Liz are a writer and also environmental and labor activists like Valerie Piven, Pam Kiely, Nanette Reeds, many of whom are from Tacoma. Really appreciated Amy Madden here, who reminded us that we are not alone. District after district of the Democratic Party has taken an unequivocal position on the LNG plant. That is a really important input. Thank you so much. I also want to thank brother Vince O'Halloran from the Maritime Trades, who representing Maritime Trades Workers. As a member of the labor movement. I stand with you and I appreciate you and your the workers you represent standing with the tribes. That is a really, really important voice as well. And I want to thank all the ordinary people, not just in Seattle or Tacoma, but around the world, who are clear about the science. As as Patricia Ireland said, you know, we are clear about the science. The only people who have an incentive in not being clear about the science are the executives and billionaire shareholders of fossil fuel companies who are the only ones who are going to benefit from this. So it's really, really important that we have been here together opposing this LNG plant. As other speakers have said, much better than I can. This is a violation of treaty rights. It's a violation of Puyallup sovereignty. And it is an attack on all Native communities. And as you all know, I strongly support all the language that was added to the first version to strengthen the position of the tribes of treaty rights and of improving tribal consultation. I think that was really important changes that were brought in and I strongly support them. I also think, though, that some key improvements need to be made that were taken out of our original resolution and then introduced in the new resolution some things that we don't agree with. And those things have already been mentioned by councilmembers Bryan and Rideout and also every other speaker who spoke today who has supported these amendments. And I'm speaking now on Amendment One, but in general, I would say about both amendments. Last week at committee, the whole issue was presented as if our movement is divided. But today, council members, you see that the movement of native leaders, native tribes and tribal members and environmental activists and social justice activists are all speaking with one voice. Everybody has spoken with one voice saying that we are we are not divided. We are not divided. We are unambiguously clear. We do not want Pearce's LNG facility in Tacoma, period. That is absolutely the bottom line. And with respect, I would disagree with the point that the process of the Seattle City Council is the most of the most sacred or the most important. What is the most sacred? And the most important is the rights of our people and of the people of tribe. And while the resolution yes, it's true that it's legally non-binding, but it is an important step in our struggle. Why do this resolution in the first place if it was not going to give a voice to our movement and to the native communities who are fighting longer? And if we're doing it, then let's do it right. The Amendment one, if passed, would remove the greenwashing language and Alec CONAN and others activists have shown very clearly. I mean, I had my own prop, but this can't compete with your prop. Oh, but as you have said, clearly, the language comes almost verbatim from Pierce's PR greenwashing language. Let us not make the mistake of putting this, you know, etching this in stone in a city council resolution of an important city like Seattle. Let's make sure that we don't get our talking point from PSC, which has no incentive to worry about climate change and every incentive to think about their own profits. And by the way, they are also not thinking of. About the ratepayers. So I will urge the Council to vote yes on this amendment. I am happy to explain the science again. I read these points out many times. I have them, but I don't want to take too much time. I'm happy to read them if council members want me to. However, what I would request. As you have heard from the community, they have spoken with one voice. They are not divided on this. They want you to pass this amendment. And that is the most important thing here. That is the most binding, in my view. That is the most binding aspect of this whole process. And if we are if we are to uphold Puyallup sovereignty, then the Seattle City Council should not be taking talking points from a corporation that is attacking the sovereignty. And I will urge the Council. To pass this amendment. And if council members are going to vote against it, I would like to hear a real reason why it's being opposed. Councilmember Herbold. Thank you. I am going to support this amendment partially in anticipation of an amendment that Councilmember O'Brien is going to be bringing forward subsequent to to these amendments. And I just want to speak directly to this question of of of the language being greenwashing language and and whose interest it is intended to represent. There's a lot that has been said about the language coming from this website. I want to say the reason why I supported inclusion of this language is because of correspondence I received not from PSC but from the Puget Sound Ports Council, Maritime Trades Department of the AFL-CIO on behalf of thousands of men and women from the region that work aboard these ships. And I want to just read from that email. As you may know, most cargo ships today run on diesel or bunker fuel, heavy fuel oils. The proposed facility would provide a critical opportunity to improve air quality for so many of our workers by using a fuel source that reduces over 90% of pollutants and reduces greenhouse gases by 15 to 25% as opposed to vessels using PFOS. We believe that the Port of Tacoma, as proposed LNG facility provides a cleaner, safer alternative for our workers that are out and around these ships every day. Currently, a tote ship servicing Alaska and calling in Tacoma uses 156 workers. A voyage, a voyage, including 80 longshoreman, 37 mechanics, 12 tug crew members, 25 officers and crews and two pilots. These vessels make 50 voyages a year, and that's 156 fewer employees per vessel per call. And this does not include the several hundred truckers driving on and off the docks while the vessels are loading, loading and unloading. So I just want folks to understand that there are there are interests that relate specifically to health concerns for our workers that were were supported by this. By this legislation. I am supporting removal of it because I do believe it's been become a distraction. And I think the strength of the process thus far is really that we have focused on the things that all voices in the social justice community, including labor, can get behind. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, Councilwoman Bryant. Thank you. First of all, I want to thank you, Councilmember Wise, for your leadership on this work. I want to say that the community meeting you held last week and having tribal elected tribal leadership at the county at the council table was a really powerful experience for me. And I know that that would not have happened without your leadership. I wish I could say that we've been doing that for years, but we haven't. But we should be doing that going forward. And I want to thank the tribal leaders who honored us with their presence yesterday. And I want to just recommit to an ongoing relationship and dialog on all issues, not just with the trial, not just with the Puyallup, but with all tribes in the region. So thank you so much for being part of that. I will I will also be supporting this amendment. When I look at the language that we're proposing to strike, I see two different things that are roughly touched upon. One is that the language talks about harmful diesel particulate matter and specifically players about what the impact that has on actual workers. And I'm going to propose an amendment after Councilmember Swan has done to make sure that we have language in this resolution that talks about our serious concerns for workers, but also talks about a path forward for making sure workers are protected and the climate is protected and the communities are protected. The other thing that this the language does is it talks about and certainly makes implications about the climate impacts of of LNG that I think are very misleading, intentionally misleading. The what we know is that, well, certainly carbon dioxide emissions may be reduced. Climate impact comes from more than just carbon dioxide. It also comes from methane. And the methane impacts of natural gas are significantly more impactful than carbon dioxide. We've talked about that at other meetings, so I won't go into more depth about that. But I think it's really important for the city council not to have as part of a resolution language that sends a misleading measure that somehow converting to natural gas is going to be good for the climate because it's not. I will speak further to my amendment when the time is right in a few moments. Very good. Okay. So we have a an amendment that's been properly moved in second. So we will and I'll ask her one to vote by hand and voice at the same time. So all those council members in favor of. I'm sorry. Yes. Quickly to the. They've already spoken to the amendment. Just want just 30 seconds. Okay. To the amendment, I. Yeah, I really think that and Brian makes an important point. I don't I appreciate Councilmember Herbals voting yes on this. That's really, really important. And that is much appreciated. I don't think, though, that this this amendment is a distraction. It is really important that we don't buy into the greenwashing language because it is extremely misleading. If you look at the entire lifecycle of LNG from the time that the water is fracked to the time that it comes to the plant, it if you look at all of that whole lifecycle, it is extremely damaging. It is extremely damaging to the planet. There's all kinds of studies that link increased rates of miscarriages for women with fracked water. I mean, there's there's any amount of science that shows that this is extremely harmful and misleading language. I didn't say that the amendment was a distraction. I said the existing language was a distraction. Thank you. Thank you. And consumer expert, I want to hear your apology. The reason why I hesitated was I've been recently going over the council rules and I found this rule that I wasn't quite aware about. Any council member can't speak twice on the same issue or twice in the same motion, which I don't think we've been enforcing. But the exception that as a person who makes the motion can can also enter the debate. So you are well within our rights to and that's why I sort of hesitated. So okay, we have a live amendment and so we'll do it by voice in hand. So all those in favor of amended amendment number one, as stated by council members want, please raise your hand and say I, I, I, I mean, you said it. Okay? All those opposed say no and raise your hand. No. So what? So it fails in Casper. Just wanted to give an amendment number two as well. Yeah. Yeah. Councilmember Sawant, you have the floor. Sorry, I move amendment two, which adds the words quote and reject Pierce's application for a permit, the proposed LNG facility, unquote. The list of actions of the Seattle City Council urges the Puget Sound Cleaner Agency do. They can get a second than I can speak a second. Thank you. We have a lot of amendment and property moved in second. Thank you. So this language was part of my original resolution, which was drafted in coordination with native leaders and other environmental activists who brought this issue to my office in the first place. And what they indicated was that it is it would be really powerful for the movement to take a message on words that said that the Seattle City Council had very clearly as the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency to reject the permit, because that's a that's a very clear action to the Puget Sound cleaner agency can take. And to quote elder Ramona Bennett, B.C. does not care because B.C. has a lot of political clout. They have a lot of wealth on their side. So they have already brazenly started their work there. They will say that they have stopped, but I have been informed by activist that's not true. And I do hope to visit the site as well. Asked me last time and I really want to do that. But the point being that he really has no incentive to listen to our voice unless we have a powerful movement from below that is standing in solidarity with the Puyallup tribe. And for that to happen, I think it is a very important thing that the resolution from the Seattle city, which is, you know, which is a very powerful voice, say very clearly that we are asking that Puget Sound clear and Clean Air Agency to reject the permit. Thank you. Thank you very much. Comes from Swan. Any further comments on amendment number two? CNN will do by voice vote again. Amendment two is articulated by councilmembers. One has been moved in second and all those in favor of amendment to please say I in raise your hand. All those opposed. Say no and raise your hand. No. So amendment number two fails, I believe. And another Amendment two, however, has resurfaced. And so we'll call in amendment number two, and that is described by Councilmember O'Brien. Councilman Brian, you have the floor. Thank you. I'm going to pull up my prompt on how I'm supposed to introduce this amendment. So. I will go ahead and move to amend Resolution 31793 by adding a new seventh recital entitled. Whereas, workers exposed to harmful particulate matter from vessels burning, diesel or bunker fuel is a serious health concern. And Seattle City Council supports finding energy alternatives that both protect workers and our climate. For a second. It's been moved in second. So this was originally the intent was to do this as a replacement for the language that we that just failed unfortunately striking that clause about from Puget Sound Energy. But it can stand on its own. So I'll continue to move it forward. As I mentioned before, I think it's important that to signify that we do care about the health impacts of workers that are directly impacted and that we believe that we can find solutions that meet both the health impacts of the workers, that protect the safety of the communities in the immediate vicinity, and also protect our climate. Thank you. Comes from Brian. Any further comments about amendment number two, consumer awareness. Thank you. Council President. First of all, I want to thank Councilmember Herbold for the letter that she read into the record, because those issues were brought to my attention as well. And I also want to thank Councilmember O'Brien for discussing this amendment with me this morning. I appreciate the time that you took for us to sit down and go through this and why it was important for that reason to be supporting this amendment. Thank you, Councilman. Worsening for the comments. So we'll do a voice vote and handle the same time again. All those in favor of amendment number two as articulated by Councilmember O'Brien. Please raise your hand and say I by all those opposed, say no and raise your hand. So the ayes have it. Okay. So we have an amended resolution. And Councilmember Waters or any other councilmembers, would you like to say anything before we pass a final vote on the amended resolution? Really good. Okay. Those in favor of adopting the resolution as amended. Please vote i. I those opposed vote no. The motion carries and the amended resolution is adopted in the chair will sign it. Thank you very much. Please read the next agenda item into the record. Agenda Item two Resolution 31801. Calling for a review of current methods for collecting data on Native communities and potential strategies for improving such data collection and exploration of the need for capacity building for organizations seeking to assist. Native Communities Committee recommends that the resolution be adopted.

A bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification for 3600 West 29th Avenue in West Highland. Approves an official map amendment to rezone property located at 3600 West 29th Avenue from U-SU-C to U-MX-2x (urban, single-unit, to urban, mixed-use) in Council District 1. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 8-21-18.

DenverCityCouncil_10082018_18-0874

Council is reconvening and we have three public hearings this evening. Speakers will have 3 minutes unless another speaker has yielded his or her time, which would result in a total of 6 minutes. Speakers should begin their remarks by telling the council their names, their cities of residence, and if they feel comfortable doing so, their home addresses. If you are here to answer questions only when your name is called, please come to the podium. State your name and note that you are available for questions of counsel on the presentation monitor. On the wall you will see your time counting down. Speakers must stay on the topic of the hearing and must direct their comments to the council members. Please refrain from profane or obscene speech. Direct your comments to council as a whole and please refrain from individual or personal attacks. Councilman Brooks, will you please put Council Bill 874. On the floor? 874 be placed on the floor. It has been moved and seconded. The public hearing for Constable 874 is open. May we have the staff report? Thank you. Council, president and Council. My name is Brandon Shaver with Community Planning and Development, presenting an official Map Amendment application to 18 i0024, which would result in property at 3600 West 29th Avenue from U.S. C to um x to x. This property is located in Northwest Denver Council District one. It is actually in Beverly in the Sloan Lake neighborhood. Uh, location is just at the southwest corner of Lowe Boulevard and West 29th Avenue. It is just over 10,000 square feet and is currently a vacant one story building that was formerly occupied by a gas station. And the proposal here is to allow for redevelopment with commercial uses. The zone district request is the um x2x that is an urban neighborhood context mixed use two storey maximum and the x two notes, limited uses and building forms. Current zoning at the site is as you see, that is urban neighborhood context single unit C lot size which is 5500 square feet. You find this zoning to the south and to the west of the subject property to the north we have campus zoning in the form of C, NPI two and to the east we have two unit zoning with the C lot size as well as the current land use on the site is commercial retail as it was formerly a gas station. And what you have surrounding here is generally single and multi-unit residential. To give you a flavor of what is around the site. Looking at the top left, we have a couple of single unit residential properties across the alley. On the bottom left, you can see the campus that is to the north and moving to the right, we have two pictures of the subject property. And then on the bottom right, a picture of the single unit residential that's directly abutting to the south. Speaking to the process here, this item was that planning board on August 1st where it was voted unanimously in favor. It then went to Judy on August 21st. And we are at council today and October 8th. And to date we have received four letters of support, one being from the registered neighborhood organization, which is the West Highland Neighborhood Organization. And we have also gotten three letters of support from the nearby property owners. This includes the property owner directly to the south and the property owner directly across the alley to the west. You're familiar with the review criteria. Staff has to find that a proposed rezoning meets all five in order for us to recommend approval. Starting with number one, we have consistency with adopted plans and two plans impact this area first comp plan and then blueprint Denver for comprehensive plan 2000. You see these noted strategies that are further detailed in the staff report. They speak mainly to environmental sustainability, promoting quality infill and giving residents in the neighborhood opportunities to live, work and play within their neighborhood. The Blueprint Denver land use concept here is single unit, single family residential. In these areas there is an employment base, but it is significantly smaller than the housing base. And single family homes are the predominant residential type. This is also in an area of stability. These areas are seeking to maintain the character while accommodating some new development at appropriate locations. And Blueprint also says that the land use regulation should aim to prevent or mitigate impacts from nonresidential development. And that is why staff has become comfortable with the application of a, um to zone district here with those lower scale uses and intensities. And lastly, the street classifications and blueprints, both Lower Boulevard and West 29th Avenue are residential collectors next? Uniformity of disregulation staff feels that this proposed rezoning will result in the uniform application of the Max to Zone District, and it will further the public health, safety and welfare by implementing adopted plans. This application identifies changed or changing conditions as justifying circumstances. I'm sure you're aware that there are a number of new residential units in the area, particularly at the commercial node at 32nd and Lowell, which is just three blocks north of the subject site. And we have also noted new bike lanes have been installed from Sheridan into downtown along 29th Avenue. And lastly, consistency with neighborhood context, zone, district purpose and intent. This does fit the urban neighborhood context where usually we see single and two unit residential uses with small scale multi-unit and commercial units that are commercial areas that are embedded in these residential areas and the um, max zone district purpose and intent. It does apply to these small sites that are embedded within existing neighborhoods and limited to the lower scale building forms and uses. With that, CPD recommends approval based on finding that all review criteria have been met. I'm happy to answer questions. An applicant is present as well. Thank you very much. We do have two individuals signed up to speak this evening, so if you signed up to speak on this item, might ask that you please come up to this first bench. I'll call your name and then you can step up to the podium and your time will start. First up, we have Reed Goolsbee. I'm the owner of the property, so I filled out the card for any questions that you may have. Could you introduce yourself? Reed Goolsby I live at 2440 Mead Street in Denver. Thank you very much. All right. And next up, we have Jesse Paris. Good evening, members of council. My name is Jesse Pearce. I am representing four Black Star Action Women for Self-defense in Denver Homicide Law, and I'm also a At-Large candidate for office in 2019. This neighborhood, West Highland, is undergoing rapid gentrification. Like many areas of the city continue gentrification in the already heavy Lee gentrified area. On this Indigenous Peoples Day, where we are denouncing colonialism and colonialists like Christopher Columbus, you want to allow colonialism in indigenous neighborhoods, in areas of the city in the midst of a housing crisis. You want to change the urban single unit to mix youth who will occupy this reason property and what is the army level? That is my question. Thank you. Thank you. That concludes our speakers. Are there any questions from members of council? Councilwoman Ortega. I just wanted to ask the applicant what your plans are to do with the property. If you can come to the microphone, please. So I initially worked with the West Highlands Neighborhood Association to kind of get an idea or feel for what, you know, the people in the neighborhood would like to see there. It's been vacant as far as I remember. I've been in the neighborhood since 2005 and it's been one of the few remaining rundown properties left in the neighborhood, actually vacant for the last three years. But we've kind of been back and forth a few times. And what we have proposed and kind of come to an agreement on with the West Highlands Neighborhood Association was a mixed use building of first floor retail, second floor office space. With that will also meet the parking requirements that come along with that. So not utilizing the existing structure but correct. Yeah, the existing structures is beyond repair at. This point and it's very small. Yes. Okay. Thank you. I have no further questions. Thank you. Councilwoman Ortega. Seeing no other questions. The public hearing for Constable 874 is closed comments by members of Council and Councilman Espinosa. Well, no, I just obviously this is the exact right zoning for this context and you don't get any more minimal mixed use zone district in single family residential neighborhood. I'm also comforted by the fact that text amendments to the Amsterdam text message to ex help with some form issues that we had previously and the Urban Townhouse Text Amendment also would help if that option were pursued. So it is I am more comforted by this base zone district today than I would have been three years ago. That's okay. But that I'll be voting to support things. All right. Thank you, Councilman Espinosa. Seeing no other comments. Madam Secretary, roll call. I. Brooks, i Flynn, i Gilmore, i Herndon, i Cashman. I can teach Lopez. I knew Ortega, i. Mr. President. I am. I'm secretary. Please close voting announced the results 11 times. 11 I is accountable. 874 has. Passed.

Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary to increase Contract No. 32995 with C.S. Legacy Construction, Inc., by $690,254, for a total not-to-exceed amount of $8,700,000, for additional work required in constructing the Chittick Field project; Increase appropriations in the General Fund (GF) in the Citywide Activities Department (XC) by $590,580; and Increase appropriations in the Capital Projects Fund (CP) in the Public Works Department (PW) by $590,580. (District 6)

LongBeachCC_04072015_15-0304

Report from I'm sorry. Item 26 Report from Public Works, Financial Management, Parks, Recreation and Marine Recommendation to increase contract. With see as legacy construction. How do you guys keep pushing? I don't mind. The raw emotion in a second. There's emotion. I say any public comment saying non-police concern. Did you want to say a few words? Just a few. I just want to thank, you know, the Parks and Public Works director, Mr. Aurora, as well as the park director, George Champion for the section work. If you guys have a chance to go by J.T. Feel, you will see the kids out there running track playing, you know, practice and football. And it's very exciting and I am very thankful for this extra money that we're saving. Thank you. I like the move to approve Councilor Brosnan. Just a comment. Yeah, just wanted to to cosign on this. I seconded the motion and and I think this is this is worthwhile. I certainly will support it. I have spent a lot of time over to the field over the last few months. And I see hundreds of kids and families and young people out there walking the track. I'm taking full advantage of this fabulous new facility park in our in our in our city. And so this is a great resource. Thanks. Thank you. Please cast your votes. Motion carries seven zero. Okay. Next up is item 27.

A bill for an ordinance making a rescission from and an appropriation in the Capital Improvements and Capital Maintenance Fund. Rescinds and re-appropriates $407,600 in the Capital Improvements Fund for Technology Services projects, moving budget from the Innovation Fund to new capital program Agency Technology Projects to better align with the programs’ purposes. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 1-28-20.

DenverCityCouncil_02182020_20-0077

Thank you, Councilmember. I will say that some of my favorite, favorite things that I've been able to sit and experience on this bench has been park naming. And this one sounds like it is going to be fantastic. So mark your calendars. Come on down or watch on Channel eight. Sounds like this is shaping up to be a great one. All right, Madam Secretary, if you will, please, with the next item on our screens. And council member said could go ahead with your questions on Bill 77. Is anybody here who can answer questions about this one? Lindsay Sherman with the Budget and Management Office. Hi, Lindsay. Can you give us a little overview of what this is for and what the dollars will be used on? Sure. So there was a year end rescission reappropriate ordinance that moved just over $3 million from the general fund to the capital funds to fund a variety of technology projects. Initially, all the projects were budgeted under iPhone Capital Project Z9 or two. This ordinance moves a portion of those that were really smaller and more operational in nature into a new capital project. 0909. And what is that? What is that for? So the four projects that will move into this new appropriation. One is a real estate planning software. Another is a tool for the Department of Finance, are reporting specifically the caption budget book to make them ADA compliant. And then there is an H.R. case management system, as well as a case management system for the Office of Municipal Public Defender.

A bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification of 1290 Williams Street in Cheesman Park. Approves an official map amendment to rezone property from G-MU-20 UO-3 to PUD-G #23 (multi-unit, 20 stories to planned development), located at 1290 Williams Street in Council District 10. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 9-15-20.

DenverCityCouncil_10262020_20-0929

Please refrain from profane or obscene speech. Direct your comments to council as a whole and please refrain from individual or personal attacks. Councilmember Torres, will you please put Council Bill 929 on the floor for passage? I love that council bill 29 to 9 be placed upon final consideration and do pass. Back and. It has been moved and seconded by Councilman Flynn. The required public hearing for Council Bill 20 dash 0929 is open. May we have the staff report, please? Yes. Thank you. Scott Robinson with Community Planning and Development. This is their request to rezone 1290 William Street from GMU 2003 to new DG number 23. The property is located in Council District ten in the Cheesman Park neighborhood, is at the southeast corner of William Street and 13th Avenue, just on the north side of Cheesman Park. The property is about 17,000 square feet and is the home of the tour's McFarland House. The request, as I said, is to be down from June 23, which is general urban context, multi-unit residential zoning with a 20 storey maximum height. And the Euro three is an historic structure use overlay, which allows additional nonresidential uses of an art studio, a bed and breakfast and non-medical offices and historic structures. The request is to resign, as I said, to Pdg 23, which is a form of custom zoning. So I'll go into more detail of what's in that in a minute. The applicants are requesting to lease on the property to allow for construction of a new annex building and allow for more diversity of uses. As I mentioned, the property is home to the charity MacFarland House, which is a Denver landmark built in 1899, landmarked in 1972. You can see the McFarland House is in the center of the property there. And then in the bottom right of the southeast corner of the property is the annex building. It was built around 1980 and is not landmarked. That is the building that the would like to replace. You can see the existing zoning properties to the west of the same Jim U 23 to the north, three for three story zoning. To the east is another opportunity in custom zoning. And then to the south is open space zoning park. And here you can see the existing land uses. Property is currently used as an office mostly surrounded by multi-unit, residential and single unit residential with a variety of mixed use, commercial and civic uses scattered throughout the neighborhood. Now you can see all the commercial uses along Colfax, two blocks to the north, and then, of course, the park to the south. Here you can see some photos. The bottom center photo is the subject property. And then the other photos are some of the surrounding properties. And then getting into what is entailed in the community. And also Pdg number 23 would be applied here. That is based on the free zone districts. Our you need to start with the base zone district and then modify from there. So this is based on GM three, which again is general urban, multi-unit, residential, three storey maximum house, maximum height. The it would allow construction in the urban house building form. And then it is divided into two sub areas. And a sub area a is the larger sub area where the existing series MacFarland houses, it would have a three storey maximum height. Most of the standard G suite requirements would apply and you get enough of that property as landmarks, structures, landmarks. Some Area B would be the southeast corner where the current annex is proposed. New annex would go. That's limited to one story in height, 20 feet, maximum height, maximum of 3500 square feet of building coverage and would allow one foot side and rear setback so on south and east to let it sit in that corner. A would also require keeping the existing nine parking spaces and then would allow some additional uses on top of what is allowed only three over three, which again is residential. And then. Art studios, breakfasts and non-medical offices, which would be which is what this is. And then on top of that would allow medical offices, restaurants, retail and a few other accessory or temporary uses. This went to planning board on September 2nd, received a unanimous recommendation approval with one condition that was requested by the applicant that the food truck use be removed. So that has been removed in the future. You have before you that was a condition of the good neighbor agreement that the applicant had negotiated with some of the neighbors. The at the hearing, 18 people spoke in support, six in opposition and three to withdraw. Opposition previously submitted letters opposing it and then subject or following the approval of the Good Neighbor Agreement have withdrawn their previous opposition parties. Went to Wednesday's Transportation and Infrastructure Committee on September 15, and it's now before you your packet, you had two letters of support from registered organizations and then 124 letters of support from individuals and 136 letters of opposition. In order to approve a rezoning, the city must find that these five criteria are met. Then there are additional criteria, criteria specific for parties that are going to after these five. I'll start with the regular five. The first criterion is consistency with adopted plans. There are three plans that apply to this property. The first is Comprehensive Plan 2014, as described in the staff report, satisfied the proposed rezoning consistent with multiple strategies from Plan 2040 across several different vision elements. Most of these are related to providing quality infill and a mixed use development and also promoting historic preservation. In terms of equity staff has found the proposed rezoning would be consistent with the strategy for the equitable, affordable and inclusive vision elements relating to providing additional amenities within existing neighborhoods to improve those neighborhoods. And in terms of climate change, that finds the proposed design inconsistent with these two strategies from the environmentally resilient vision element relating to ENSO and mixed use development. Reducing the need for people to travel to get to services. So staff finds the proposed rezoning consistent with Co-operative Plan 2040. The next plan is Blueprint Denver from 2019. The future neighborhood context designation for this property is General Urban, which calls for generally multi-unit residential with residents or commercial and mixed use embedded in those residential neighborhoods. Consistent with the proposal, and commercial should be in a variety of building forms, including residential building form such as this. The Future Place designation is high residential, which again calls for predominantly residential, but commercial uses should be interspersed throughout, which is appropriate in this location. 13th Avenue is designated a residential arterial street, which again calls for primarily residential, but also may include a variety of other uses, including small retail nodes. The gross strategy designation is all other areas of the city, which is intended to accommodate 10% of new jobs and 20% of new housing by 2040. And then Blueprint Denver also includes additional strategies, recommendations that apply here, including multiple strategies about historic preservation. So the community would help preserve the existing MacFarland house and help with adaptive reuse so that it can be continued to use, be used and preserved going into the future. So there are multiple strategies that the proposed beauty is consistent with along those lines. And then Blueprint Denver also includes recommendations around using custom zoning such as these, and says they generally should not be used except where there are extraordinary circumstances and there's not a standard district that would fit. And that's the situation in this case. There's no standards on districts with the existing landmark House that would allow reasonable development of the property. Without an unreasonable number of waivers or conditions. So it is appropriate to in this location and for this proposed development. So staff finds the proposed rezoning consistent with group in Denver. The third plan is the recently adopted East Central Area Plan. It has the same context and place designation as blueprint under general urban, high residential and as definitions are consistent and as I just went over, the proposal is consistent with those designations. The Essential Area plan also includes additional recommendations around historic preservation, including recommendations that to facilitate adaptive reuse, allowing a broader range of uses, including commercial use, as I can be appropriate, which is the situation in this case allowing a broader range of uses through this. That will help preserve and adapt. We use the term in the Parliament House that finds the proposed rezoning consistent with studies of area plan and finds the first criterion met. The second criterion is uniformity of district regulations. STEP finds the proposed rezoning would result in uniform application of the Custom Zone District on this location. The third criterion is to promote the public health, safety and general welfare of city staff. The first rezoning would do so by implementing the city's plans and promoting historic preservation, as I described. The fourth criterion is justifying circumstances that imposed rezoning justified by changing conditions in the area. There has been some redevelopment in the surrounding blocks increasing the population, increasing the number of people in need of services, allowing a broader range of services. Either it is appropriate and then also changes on the property within the annex building is fairly old at this point and the existing zoning wouldn't let redevelopment of that building. So a change in zoning is needed to allow for the reinvestment in the property that is needed. The fifth criterion is consistency with neighborhood context. The purpose of the proposed rezoning would allow it consistent with the general urban neighborhood context, which again is the base zone district of the duty and then for purpose of intent has its own specific criteria that will go into now. So a few criteria. Your final of the first is that the district is consistent with the intent purpose of districts that have described the zoning code that found that that is the case because the customer zoning here is necessary to promote the historic preservation of the existing historic structure of the Urban House. To do so with a standard zoned district would require several variances or waivers from a standard zoning district. So in this case, it is appropriate would allow for a specific diversification in the use of land by allowing more uses of this location, while also maintaining a development pattern that is compatible with the established neighborhood in character and design. The second criterion is that the party complies with the technical standards and criteria of the zoning code, which staff has found that it does. The third criterion is that the development is not feasible under any other zone district and would require an unreasonable number of variances or waivers and conditions which, as I just described the standards this. The fourth criterion if the district would establish permitted uses that are compatible with existing land uses as described in the plan analysis. A wider range of commercial uses are appropriate here, so staff finds that this criterion was met, and the fifth criterion that the duty would establish permitted building forms that are compatible with adjacent building forms. Again, the allowable building form under the view is Urban House, which is consistent with the general urban and GM context of the surrounding area. So that finds the beauty criteria are met and recommends approval finding all criteria have been met. I will be happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Thank you, Scott, for the report. Tonight, council has received three written comments on Council Bill 929. There are two submitted comments in favor of the bill and one submitted comment in opposition of the application. All members of Council that are present have certified that they have read each of the submitted written comments. Do any members need more time in order to read all of the written testimony that was submitted? Seeing no hands raised. Council Secretary. Let the record reflect that all written testimony in favor and in opposition of Council Bill 929 have been read by each member of Council and all written testimony will be submitted to the official record of the hearing. Tonight, we have 22 individuals signed up to speak this evening. And I wanted to just remind folks that we also have the hearing on the mayor's proposed budget and another hearing after this one. And so if you feel like you're repeating what others have said before, if you could keep your comments to a minimum , that would be much appreciated. Our first speaker that we're going to be bringing up is Bruce O'Donnell. Hello. This is Bruce O'Donnell. Can you hear me? Mm hmm. Go ahead, Bruce. Thank you, Madam President. And members of Council Bruce O'Donnell, 386 Emmerson Street in Denver. And I'm the owner's rep on this rezoning application as identified in CPD staff report recommending approval and also planning board unanimously recommending approval of the resulting request. This application meets the legal criteria for the rezoning it's consistent with and supported by and implements many goals of the city's adopted plans, including Plan 2040 Blueprint, Denver in the Capitol Hill, Cheesman Park Neighborhood Plan, and more recently, the East Central Area Plan has been adopted. And this specifically is an implementation step of the East Central Area plan, which wants to facilitate compatible infill development and facilitate adaptive reuse of historic structures by allowing a broader range of uses, including compatible commercial uses and appropriate additions. Extensive community outreach over more than two years has taken place to garner support and get neighborhood input on the result of this, which is included focus groups, surveys, open houses and numerous meetings in this effort culminated in our Executing a Good Neighbor agreement with our immediate neighbors on the highways of both next door sides of us to the east and west. This good neighbor agreement has been recorded in the Denver Clerk and Recorder's office. And among other things, it limits the operations allowed in the city and addresses things like parking, management, noise and odor in that constrains the use of the site from an operating perspective much more than just the zoning would. With all this being said, I request that City Council vote to approve Council Bill 20 Dash 0929 Rezoning 1290 William Street to Pdg 23 and I'm available to answer any questions of council. Have any. Thank you for your time. Thank you, Bruce. Next up, we have Andrew Roque. All right. Well, thank you, Madam President. My name is Indrani, and I live at 1530 Detroit Street. I have been a chess board member since 2017, and I'm also a resident of the South City Park neighborhood. Professionally, I work as a senior planner for the city of Sheridan in Arapahoe County. So planning issues are very important to me. As a planner, I'm also aware of both the opportunities and challenges presented by writing a customized PDF document. So I would like to thank Scott Robinson with CPD for his time and knowledge and helping us create ours. I remember back in 2017 I attended my first board meeting and I just remember being so impressed with the Teachers McFarland mansion, but then also realizing over the past three years how much work it truly needs in order to become a community gathering hub once again. During my time on the board, Chun is engaged in extraordinary outreach efforts to both invite community feedback and then eventually to communicate our vision and really the neighborhood's vision for the towers back to the neighborhood. This evening, I would like to touch on some of the key events and milestones that Chan reached in its community engagement efforts . These include three community focus groups, which we held in fall of 2017 and where we obtained specific input on uses from over 50 participants. We also held annual updates at Chen's membership meetings over the past three years. We conducted multiple in-person meetings in open houses with our directly adjacent neighbors at both one Cheesman Place and the Highgate Townhomes. In the summer of 2019. We. Conducted surveys directly with park users and collected over 125 responses. The project has also been featured in multiple articles in life on Capitol Hill and other local publications. China's also conducted targeted Facebook posts linked to our project website, which have garnered thousands of unique impressions. We've also obtained support letters from Denver nonprofit institutions such as P Flag, which was a former tenant of the tiers and historic Denver, which holds a facade easement on our building. And finally, and something I'm most proud of, we gathered over 100 individual letters of support for the project. So to conclude, I believe that China's truly went above and beyond in communicating our plans for the future of the Tours McPherson mansion. And I enthusiastically urge that City Council approves the 1290 William Street PD. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, we have Jesse Paris. Being a member of the council watching out my name is just a pause and I hope the Denver homeless out loud black starts to limit the scope of his commitment to social change as well as the party of Colorado. And while. And I will be your next mayor in 2023. I am against this rezoning. I just wanted to know what the 136 opposition was all about. And Andrew said that John had reached out to several people in the community and of outreach, and that showed some kind of due diligence on his part. But I want to say that 136 letters opposition about and. Oh. Trying. I would really like to know that. And while. So much opposition against the speedy rezoning. So, Michael, please answer those questions. I would appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you, Jesse. Next up, we have Sandra Goldhaber. Go ahead, please. Sandra. Okay. Can you hear me? Mm hmm. Go ahead. Can you hear me? Okay. I'm Sandra Tabor. Thanks for the opportunity to. Speak with you tonight. I live at. 763 Race Street on the south end of Cheesman Park. And I'm speaking to you today in support of the rezoning of the Tours House at 1290 William Street. 763 Race is my second hundred year old home. On the Cheesman parameter. And I also own two condos right near the park. I'm invested thus, both financially and emotionally, in this beautiful neighborhood. I walk the park every day. I became imprinted on the. Park. In the 1970 779 era when I actually worked in the mansion working for at the time Denver Social Services, now Denver Human Services. And my office was on the second floor and my little desk overlooks the park. So I always wanted to be able to move back and finally achieved it. So you can imagine my me when I had. The chance to tour the mansion in early 2020 and the chipping pin on the bridge and the squeaking stairs, all the deferred maintenance that a nonprofit like Chan could never afford to accomplish on their own. I think any of you who live in or around an old house know that it it can be a black hole. This, as a stakeholder of historic preservation, I support the rezoning for the following two reasons. One is historic preservation. The partnership with City Street, which you'll hear more about, will both preserve the property and protect the low profile nature of any structures on it, including the remodeled. Annex. Well, improving the interior deferred maintenance. Second, that's really important to me is safety in the park. The main modeling of the annex and the restoration of the cafe, which existed in the annex in the 1980s, will increase the eyes on the park. It will improve that community gathering space, as well as provide an attractive venue for adults to have a coffee while their kids play on the patio, maybe have an ice cream and really and offer a place for neighbors to interact and be right there in the first floor of the park. In. This work and facility has been shown by surveys of the neighbors to help read, support and enthusiasm. So I'm in favor of the rezoning and I recommend that council approve the rezoning of 1298. Williams to page 23. Thank you so much. Okay, thank you, Sandra. Next up, we have Travis Leiker. Greetings. My name is Travis Leiker and I am a Denver resident and current president of Capitol Hill United Neighborhoods. And I want to thank Denver City Council for convening tonight's meeting. I would also like to thank the scores of community leaders, especially the town board staff, volunteers and our partners who helped try and get to this point . China is committed to preserving the past, improving the present, and planning for the future of the greater Capital Hill community. Through smart planning, historic preservation, community investments and programs. China serves as the go to collective voice for Denver residents and our unique neighborhoods. Since 2005, we've owned the Tears McFarland House and Community Center, which is at 1290 Williams. And while the property is currently zoned for 20 stories of residential use, a large structure of this magnitude is something that we think would alter the quality and character of the neighborhood. Instead, we've proposed tonight a different course of consideration for you. The Tears McFarland House is iconic, and it's a historic landmark, so the house and mansion itself will not be touched. Under this rezoning proposal, with the exception of some much needed restoration and preservation. To help preserve this landmark, however, we're partnering with City Street investors to build a new single story, Neighborhood Friendly Cafe, to improve the overall property and add amenities that have been requested by the neighbors. All homes, and especially older ones like this, need much needed maintenance and updating, especially after four decades of deferred maintenance. The revenues collected from the cafe will keep the mansion updated, historic and iconic. It will also allow China to deliver its critical neighborhood services, investments and programs for decades to come. The proposed rezoning, along with the cafe, is intended for residents to immediately enjoy and use whether they walk, bike, bus run or roll from their homes or nearby workplace. And then the the mansion itself will continue to serve as a community asset where neighbors gather, discuss issues, collaborate and shape the future of the greater Capitol Hill community. For three years now, Chan has garnered feedback from residents, business owners and stakeholders, and they've overwhelmingly voiced delight just as they did when they when the cafe first opened back in the 1980s. Whether they were attending a performance of the Denver brass or joining their book club for a great conversation and thoughtful discussion, Chen understands that there is going to be opposition tonight, and we've addressed those concerns and our good neighbor agreement with many of the neighbors that are surrounding the area. More than 20 commercial businesses already exist within less than a quarter of a mile from Cheesman Park. Like the Denver Botanic Gardens. But a constant presence at the north end of the park will enhance safety for patrons and passers by. This revitalization effort and neighborhood friendly amenity are designed for the community to do what communities do best, and that's come together. So I encourage you to vote in favor of this rezoning application, and I'll be available for questions should they arise. Thank you so much for your time. Thank you. Next up, we have Joel Brown. Hello. My name is Joel Brown. I live at 1801 Pennsylvania Street in County District ten. I want to thank Councilmember Hines for his leadership and his statements tonight. This year's McFarland House is a great historic asset on the north side of Cheesman Park. I visited it many times. When I go to Cheesman Park, I usually walk or bike there and I'm excited for the future of this property. It's a really cool building that has served as a meeting space for nonprofits, and I think to have a café attached to it would really be a win win for the community and the neighborhood. Just to address Jesse's concerns about the letters of opposition. From my understanding, most of the opposition was relating to parking. As I mentioned, there was nine parking spots. And I think that that those concerns were mitigated in the Good Neighbor Agreement. So I'll end my statements here by saying I hope you will approve the rezoning to a pad because that's it meets it conforms to the criteria as stated. Thank you. Thank you. We have Michelle Steed up next. Hi. My name is Michelle Steed, and I live in the Driving Park Historic District just. South of Cheesman Park. Thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight. I am speaking tonight in favor of Sean's rezoning application for 1290 William Street. I have spent several hours volunteering for Capitol Hill United Neighborhoods, attending meetings, participating in special events, and being engaged in my neighborhood. I throughout the years, Sean has been an invaluable part of our community and as a model registered neighborhood organization that promotes an inclusive culture and is working every day to make Denver a fair, equitable city. For as long as I have been a supporter and member of John, I've been engaged in a number of conversations about this property for. Close to a decade. What will happen to tears? Folks will ask. It needs work and should be open to the community. Others will comment. Now Trent is coming to City Council to support a rezoning that will help to activate a beloved community asset, the historic Teres McFarland House, just north of Cheesman Park. This will bring much needed restoration and care to this architectural gem and fuel chance programing to our neighborhood for years to come. Transplant outlined in this page aligns with the recently adopted East Central Area Plan perfectly. The East Central Area Plan calls on future development. To promote. To promote preservation of historic and character defining single unit multi-unit and mixed use. Develop mixed use. Buildings and to consider individual landmarks, historic districts and other tools as appropriate trends through rezoning, application and plans aligned with this criteria. I also support. This rezoning because I live near a city street investors project the city street near Gilpin Street. I live on Gilpin Street and the on Sixth Avenue and city street investors there. Their good neighbors like through we set up. Sorry, I'm nervous. I did this call for hours thinking about how I'm going to say this. But we've set up good neighborhood agreements and they're good neighbors. Things happen in the city and we can call on them and and things are addressed. And I feel safer having these businesses around. And I want you to vote in favor of this rezoning so that I can go to the north side of the park and enjoy the tears. McFarland building being. Updated and having a café. Thank you. Thank you, Michelle. Next up, we have Randall Lowe. Good evening. It's a great honor to speak to you after such a long time. I'm an advocate on homeless issues in the city and county, and I've been involved with. John. From the standpoint of the Denver Voice newspaper, when we used to have wranglings with John regarding the presence of homeless people in the community. This goes back to the 1990s. I used to work with Tom Knorr and we got to know each other on the commission and my brother Roger Armstrong, who used to be the executive director , and Andy Hanna, who used to do my job. I'm the groundskeeper, I'm the ghost, John. And I've been in that capacity for over a decade. I worked on the People's Fair back in the very beginning of the century. And I must say, this is a place which for me is hallowed ground. And when I use that word, I'm a pastor, I'm a chaplain. I mean that it is a place where people can gather together. My wild rabbits can gather together, the crows can gather together. And we can share in an environment which is holistic for us all. And I really appreciate the opportunity to at least tell you from my heart that this is everything to me. And having been on the board of Charleston, I.N.S., an executive committee of both. I have always been. Honored to be a part of this organization and to contribute my sweat and tears to making series Macfarlane operate. And even though we might be shabby, we are home. And that's all I can say. It means a great deal to me to make it possible for it to continue in perpetuity for as long as is possible. Thank you for your attention. Thank you. Next up, we have Rachel Griffin. You might have to unmute, Rachael. David. Go ahead. I had a. Fancy. Microphone and stuff and I guess it's not fancy after all. Thank you so much for giving me the opportunity to share my support, to return the tears made. For holding us back to a vibrant. Community center gathering place. And in. It. My name is Rachel Griffin. I have lived in Denver at ten Cheesman Park. Neighborhood for 20 years. When I was in high school, I was allowed to use advisory commission of my own local community center in Lakewood. I planned events for my peers. I hosted guest lecturers, encouraged active. Youth participation in the community. And now, as a parent. I began the 600 member hotline, Capitol Hill Parents Group, to help continue that. Community. Activism and to show my own children. And example of volunteerism and building the goals of our group are bringing together. Urban dwellers who are choosing. To raise children in their urban environments. We seek to cultivate community. By connecting families with one another and the necessary resources to take advantage. Of life. To put that into play for the greater Capitol Hill area. We want to lead and partner with local and state government businesses, educational. And nonprofit organizations. And we seek to advocate for programs and causes such as strong neighborhood schools, housing and diversity, enhanced public safety. Environmental quality. And expanded cultural. And. Recreational. Opportunities. That said, Capital Hill. Environment and amenity infrastructure often. Leaves out the family demographic. It's often a cycle of limited. Family. Amenities, leaving too few true community. Spaces for them due to our. Invisibility. People often believe that Capitol Hill has fewer kids than it really does because. Honestly, there are very few places. Together. We truly appreciate the Harlem Rec Center, Park Pool, Cheesman Park, City Park, Playgrounds and more. But we are still lacking for welcoming indoor free spaces to gather and build community. If Council approves this rezoning request, our group looks forward to using the revitalized Gathering Spaces. Café and. Resurrected Community Center at the preserved landmark known as the Tears McFarland House to host Capitol Hill parents events building enjoyment with all types of families, encourage youth participation in the community and help trying to continue further to further the mission. We look forward to turning our online group into an active force in the neighborhood by taking full advantage of the introduction of a free and accessible meeting space. We look forward to further. Engaging Capitol Hill residents no matter what they do for a living. Which they are. Oh, and you're saying took away my sickness or what? Or what they look like. So we urge you to. To voice your support for this reason. Thank you. Thank you, Rachel. Bill de Mayo is next. Yes. Thank you. My name is Bill de Mayo and I live at 1880 Little Raven Streets, but have been on the board of Gen for about ten plus years. And I was involved in the repairs and maintenance of the building during that time and the. Amazing part of that. Time that I found there was that every time we undertook a project or turned it into any kind of repair, it turned into much more expensive than obviously one could deal with. So when we took the opportunity to partner ourselves with the city street investors, we found that there was a partnership that created this wonderful experience to turn this property back into the community center that it really wants to be and. I hope that you will support the rezoning to allow this property to be to continue to maintain its role in the neighborhood in the Cheesman Park neighborhood. So thank you very much for allowing me to speak. Thank you. We have Kevin Kelly next. Greetings. Denver City Council. My name is Kevin Kelly and I live in the East Cheeseman Park neighborhood at 12th and dime. I was born in Denver and my family has made Denver home for six generations. I'm a frequent volunteer for historic Denver, and I've also served on the board of Capitol Hill United Neighborhoods for more than four years and co-chair our History Matters Committee. Since I joined John, the organization has made significant strides to improve its financial health, support the community, advance critical issues at the city level, and bring the community together. Tonight, we are here to talk about John's rezoning for a 1290 Williams Street. As co-chair of one of our enduring committees, I am passionate about preserving historic properties and activating them in creative ways. The rezoning application being considered by council tonight just does just that. It will create certainty around the future uses of the property, office space, community, meeting space and added amenities like a café for the neighborhood. The Landmark mansion will be preserved for future generations of Denver ites, and it will receive the much needed maintenance it has required for decades. Joan has engaged in community outreach efforts, including neighborhood surveys and focus groups. The levels of outreach and engagement are extraordinary and we value the neighborhood feedback we have received over the past three years . Finally, preserving historic architectural assets is an essential is essential to maintaining neighborhood character and enduring legacy. Joan was an integral to the efforts to preserve Tamron Hall and recently endorsed the restoration and reuse of the former Cathedral Hill High School at 18th and Grant Street. We are excited to take our great work in these projects and apply it to our new home. Thus, the request for a rezoning is consistent with and implements recommendations and comprehensive plan. 2040 Blueprint. Denver. The Capitol Hill. Cheeseman Park. Neighborhood Plan and the 2020 East Central Area Plan. I asked Denver City Council to approve this application and thank you for your time. Thank you. We have Vicki Berkley up next. Hi. I'm Vicky Berkley. I live on Ninth and Logan in Capitol Hill. I'm involved with Chun is vice president of Community Engagement. I'm a community development professional and have worked for nearly 40 years assisting residents in enhancing their neighborhoods and small communities in Colorado, as well as other states in the U.S.. And in 2019, I joined the Chan board and now apply my community experience to my own neighborhood Capitol Hill, for example, with board support. I launched Chan's Seed Awards, which provide micro grants to encourage civic entrepreneurship and community engagement. In just the first year, Chan awarded 12 seed awards to nonprofits and individuals, providing support to projects that improve safety, promote diversity, foster environmental stewardship and provide enrichment. Urban planners know that third places have a number of important community building attributes. The Curious McFarlane House has served as a third place in Capitol Hill for decades, providing a welcoming place where everyone is treated as social equals. This third place is playing a critical role in breaking down social silos in Denver, which is so important during these times of division and fear. It tears. McFarlane House serves as a place where people can gather to discuss issues impacting our city and collaborate to shape the future of Capitol Hill. Chan has supported a range of events over the years, inviting residents to get to know their neighbors and engage in projects that enhance our community. Chan has served as a neutral ground for sensitive topics in the tours. Macfarlane House has provided the third place for these meetings. For a number of years. A cafe did operate at the Cheers MacFarland house, where people could chat over coffee and a sandwich. Capitol Hill has no doubt benefited over the decades because people could utilize the tourist Macfarlane house as a third place where they could hold fundraising events, holiday gatherings and a host of other activities. I'm excited about the partnership between John and City Street investors who have a proven track record for creating amazing third places such as the Union Station. This partnership will only improve that year's Macfarlane house as a valued neighborhood asset. And can you continue to provide a third place that is open to all? I'm in favor of rezoning and request that the Denver City Council approved the rezoning of 1290. William Street, Depew RD, June 23. Thank you so much. Thank you. We have Peggy Randall up next. Yes, thank you. Can you hear me? Mm hmm. Go ahead. Thank you, Madam President, for this opportunity to speak to you all this evening. Again, my name is Peggy Randall. I live at 343 University Boulevard in Denver, and I live and walk the country club neighborhood. And Cheesman Park is really one of my favorite destinations. For inspiration. And a connection to our great city. I'm speaking to you in support of the Tears McFarland mansion as an icon and treasure to be preserved to maintain the character of historic Capitol Hill, to live on for future generations. I believe in. Creating something new and visionary for a Capitol Hill community. What's better. Planning. Then for our future than a cup of coffee, maybe a glass. Of wine. After a beautiful walk or bike ride around some spectacular historic Cheesman Park. That is why I urge you to vote yes on the rezoning of 1290 William Street, Pdg 23. The Future is now. Thank you very much for your time this evening. Thank you. We've got Bruce Corgi. Up next. I'm sorry, Bruce, if I mispronounced your last name. No worries. Thank you, Madam President. And members of council. My name is Bruce Coy, and I'm a resident of Denver, a lifelong resident who lives at 1394 Vine Street. I am the retired executive director of the Colorado Association of School Executives and a nonprofit leader in other ways as well. I'm also the author of The Colorado Guide and Colorado Fest and appreciate Denver's history more than you can imagine. My grandparents lived at 19, Reese. My parents lived at 12th and raised my brother lives at 14th and. Franklin And my wife and I live at 14th and Vine. And we all think of the park as a crown jewel in Denver. It needs to be preserved and also that the youth should be open and this project opens this up. I definitely support the rezoning for 1290 William Street. I do serve on the town board and I am the co-chair of the History Matters Committee with Kevin Kelly, and I think he summed up a lot of my comments. So I'm going to my bottom line so we can save you some time. This is the kind of project to create lasting a lasting community resource. In keeping with the history of the area. It also preserves a valuable asset adjacent to the park on its northern edge. I recommend approval of the zoning request with a mindset of equity, access and inclusion for all residents. Thank you. Thank you, Bruce. Next up, we have Peter Wells. Hi, everybody. Thanks for taking my call. I guess we all do zooms all the time. I'm actually one of the residents that is most affected by this decision. So when you saw Scott Robinson's detail of his maps, they showed ten townhouses there, the Highgate townhouses that are immediately east of Chun. If I went outside and made a snowball but the smell is not good enough to make snowballs, I could probably throw a snowball and hit Chun. So we know all too well what it means from noise and all the other things, because we've heard they sponsored weddings and things of that nature. So the biggest concern from a practical perspective from our from neighbors and I'm not here representing the highway or any of the neighbors, I'm just representing myself. Is the noise the possible you know, we don't want a Blake Street kind of bar suddenly plopping down next to us where they're playing cornhole till midnight and playing music. But we would love a place where we could go and have a coffee, a pastry for breakfast, a late lunch, maybe get a glass of wine for for dinner. I'm a Colorado native, but I lived in New York City. You know, they they they know how to do things in parks. And you can get a glass of wine in Central Park in New York, and it's wonderful. So the idea of being able to have a neighbor immediately close by who will respect our privacy but also provide a service, is a wonderful, wonderful opportunity that I hope we don't give up. Just so you know, these ten townhouses weren't here 30 years ago. The reason they're here is because the city council agreed to close the High Street entrance into Cheesman Park, and that rezoning allowed us to have this marvelous, marvelous home where we live on the park. And I think this is going to be a nice addition to exactly what we're looking for is a great place to live. So I'm in favor of it. I can't speak for my neighbors, but I can tell you this the developers negotiated in a good faith fashion, the GNC. They really did. They came to the table, open arms, and we now have something I think we can live with again. I can't speak for my neighbors, but I think this is a wonderful idea and I hope to be able to go get a glass of wine at our new neighbors sooner rather than later. Thanks for listening. Thank you. We have Charles news from. You might have to go. Charles. Hi. Can you hear me? Mm hmm. Go ahead. I am Charles Nussbaum. Thanks so much for letting me speak in support of the zoning change. I lived in the 1400 block of Detroit. I've been in Congress for 20 years. My two teams are now East Angels. But it wasn't that long ago that we used to ride bikes over to the playground at Cheesman and also to the special CSO concerts. It would have really been nice to stop along the way to or from you get a snack. Here's my. I think this is going to be an amazing game changer for so many people that are walking, riding, rolling, biking, anything to and from the park to be able to meet with your friends, neighbors, colleagues and talk about anything or have a small community meeting. Many of you used to go to the people's fair, and that's how China derived most of his income. Well, that's gone. We've we've gone to other fundraising efforts. And this is going to be an incredible partnership with amazing placemakers that we have to be proud of here in the city that really want to make it special for everybody and minimize any controversy and minimize the noise, minimize the parking infringement on the neighbors. And I think that it's critical to transmission to be able to share in the income from such a café in order to provide these critical services that have never been more pertinent. I mean, so many people need their voices heard. I mean. Advocacy and support is critical to so many. Regarding licensing, homelessness, parking, safety, density, development, traffic, transportation, historic preservation, walkability, likability and general accessibility just to name a few of the things that we're involved in. So we don't have to take care of a historic mansion and can do that for the community while partnering with State Street. I think it's a win win for everybody and I appreciate all the different points of view. I'm a member of the board and a past president and I'm really hoping that council will join in approving this zoning change and that we can be an example for the rest of the city and the state and the nation. Many heartfelt thanks for your time and consideration. Thank you. Our next speaker is James LaRue. Madam President. Council Members Good evening. My name is James LaRue. I live at 1050 Sherman Street in Cap Hill. Being a chess board member since December 2019 even got up to attend one physical meeting before the pandemic hit. For five years now, I've been living without a car. I walk, bike or take mass transit everywhere, and it's really surprisingly easy. In Denver, I really enjoyed getting to know the neighborhoods and bike paths. I probably walk or bike around Cheesman Park two or three times a week, often with area friends, and I'm looking forward to biking to in-person meetings in the future and continuing my conversations with people after meetings or walks over a cup of coffee. We can't have too many warm and welcoming spaces in our community, and I'm proud to be a part of making those spaces. As a longtime practitioner of community centered planning, I was a public library director for many years. I found a vision for the future of the Tours McFarland House compelling. It contributes to a rich and engaging, pedestrian centered civic life. I've been impressed by the persistent and positive outreach of the community, both over the past 50 years and as evidenced by our work on a good neighbor agreement around this project. So I'm in favor of the rezoning and requested the city council approved the Brazilian request. Thank you so much for your time and attention today. I know the work that goes into balancing the interests of community members and I appreciate your time. Thank you. Thank you. Debbie Young is our next speaker. Debbie, you might have to unmute yourself. How's that? Great. Go ahead. Okay. So good evening. And I know it's getting late, so I thank you for your continued time this evening. I live in the 600 block of Milwaukee and I am speaking in favor of the rezoning proposal this evening. When my husband and I moved here not so long ago, we chose Congress part because of this community feel with historic homes, mature trees, parks nearby, and mostly for walkability. We've lived off and on in Europe and love the charm and community feel of their walkable cities and parks and cafes for neighbors to meet. So I like many of the others, I walk around Cheesman Park most days of the week. I love its beauty, which includes the iconic architecture of the historic Piers McFarland House. I love that this proposal will continue to. Protect. That historic nature and that the partners in John and the people that are building it are committed to restoring this grand home. I love the idea of a cafe adjacent to the north end of this great park, where I will be able to sit and enjoy a coffee or tea with people in my community, maybe even. Peter Wells wants to be there and will join for a glass of wine. I also understand that it's very expensive to restore historic homes and I love that the idea of this simple cafe will help. Fund the. Much needed work to keep this beautiful house historic and iconic. So I am in favor of the rezoning and request. The Denver City Council approved the rezoning. Of. 1290 William Street. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Patricia McHenry. I. Thank you very much. I live at 653 Reyes Street, just south of Cheesman Park. I'm a principal with Citi Street Investors. And as you've heard, we're partnering with China. I and my city street partners are passionate about old buildings, but even more so. We're passionate about. Reinvigorating historic property and making. Neighborhoods better. You've already heard a lot. About the. Extensive outreach that went on. To. Identify. What was. Missing and desired in the neighborhood. And we look forward. To providing. Our. Tenant bases over 95% locally owned, and we've created over 20 different. Food and beverage operations. The casual. Café. That we will be bringing to. Tears foreign will. Be an amazing amenity to the neighbors. Including me. I would like to thank the city and the neighborhood, two. Of the four island for working with us over. Many months for this rezoning, creating the café concept. And the Good Neighbor. Agreement. I urge you. To. Approve this rezoning application. Thank you. Next up, we have Ian Tafoya. Counsel My name is Ian Thomas Tafoya. Reside in District two, but I formerly lived in City Park West for about seven years. I am a charter member still because I work in the Capital Hill area and I am a former town board member. I am in support of this project because I believe it's reasonable and in scale to bring a much needed amenity to the community and to save this amazing historic property. Now I am an historic Denver board member and trustee. I'm not speaking on their behalf tonight, but in this role I have participated with Latinos and Heritage and Conservation, where they're doing a similar project in Houston to save the original House of Blue like a union house. So I think this is innovative. This is something that's happening around the country. And I've done myself a birthday party here on the park. It's amazing to be able to have both of this available. So I'm in support and thank you again. Thank you. Our next speaker is Joe Foster us. It evening. Thank you, everyone. I will be extremely brief. I think so many positive things have been said already. I don't have much to add to it. I would. I guess I should say my address is 1115 Acoma Street, Denver. This has been a privilege for my my partners at City Street Investors and I to work on this special project. And this is an example of a rezoning that was done the right way. Extensive, extensive community outreach, really custom crafting, not only the zoning, but the specific uses for the property and the good neighbor agreement that we put together. It's just an example of how to do this, right. A couple of points I'd make about this and then so we can move on is just is really just to one is just want to remind everybody, this is a 5050 partnership between city street investors and Capitol Hill United Neighbors. So it's it's innovative in that respect that you have a nonprofit organization partnering with a for profit organization in order to bring this project back to life. This project was donated to the city by by the owners decades ago with the specific desire that it be a community gathering place. And we're going to make that happen. What has really hurt the property over the years is not figuring out how to be financially sustainable. So as a result it has fallen into disrepair. Trends that are a yeoman's job of really keeping it together. But it's time for a major redo. And this sort of private partnership with a nonprofit is going to allow us to to bring sustainable financial sustainability for the project so that the House can be restored to its former glory and it can really fulfill the vision of being the community gathering place that was originally envisioned when the owners donated to the city some decades ago. So with that, I just say I think the rezoning meets the criteria and respectfully request that council approve this application. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, council members. We appreciate it. Thank you. And our last speaker this evening is Megan Whalen. Thank you and I will be brief. I have. Gained quite an appreciation for the. Amount of time you folks spend. In these meetings. And I understand we're. Just the first part of what. You've got teed up here. My name is Megan Whalen. I reside at 520 Marion Street. And I'm also an owner of a small business in. South City Park. I'm speaking today. In support. Of the rezoning of the. Tour's. McFarland property. I was born here in Denver and have lived near Cheesman Park for most of my life. My dad taught us kids how to play softball. In the park. Just so. Many fond. Memories. And I've walked and run the park. Trails more times. Than I can catalog. Several years ago, I was I responded to an invitation to participate in a focus group about the future of the tiers. And the annex and Capitol. Hill United Neighborhoods role. In the future of the. Property. I was excited to learn about the opportunity to create an amenity for park users that would be leveraged to provide resources to restore and maintain the Tears House, which is. A neighborhood. Jewel, and to. Allow it to remain in the hands of children. When I when I was asked about my park use in the focus group, I and most others reported that we. Walk, bike or. Roll to the. Park. And I'm just. Delighted by the potential here to meet friends for coffee. In the park that we all love. Thank you so much for your time. Thank you. That concludes our speakers questions from members of council. Councilman Hines. I thank you, Madam President, for. Question for Mr. Robinson. There were 126 letters in support and 134 letters in opposition to the planning board. Is that correct? That includes a few that came in between planning board and last week. But that was mostly mostly when. And were those received before or after the Good Neighbor Agreement was signed? And that came in the form of. Okay, thank you. That's all I have. Thank you, Madam President. All right. Thank you, Councilman Hines. Saying No other questions from members of council. The public hearing for Council Bill 20 Dash 909 excuse me to nine is closed comments by members of Council. Councilman Hines. Thank you, Madam President, I. This is in district ten. I am very familiar with this property. I have been to this property many times, including both the historic building and the non historic annex behind the building. I am excited that this rezoning will preserve and revitalize the historic structure while getting rid of the dilapidated structure behind the historic building. It's really dilapidated. I recognize that there were originally concerns about this rezoning, and I'm excited that China has heard those concerns of the neighbors and reflected those concerns in a signed good neighbor agreement. The to stop simplified noise, it requires the place to close early and has so many other options that provide a tasteful balance between the development and the property owners that are incredibly close by. I see Chun as a model R.A. and I am happy that they continue to work with the community to be a good neighbor and to make our community stronger and better connected. This is definitely in line with my vision of the 20 minute neighborhood that I want so passionately for Denver's perfect ten and for all of Denver. I am elated to personally know so many of those who testified tonight. It is a roll down memory lane to see and hear from so many of you. I feel comfortable saying that virtually every neighborhood and it was perfect ten were represented in testimony tonight. Finally, I am in favor of this rezoning as I believe it means rezoning for Girard and hope my colleagues support it as well. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilmember Hines. And seen no other hands raised. I do agree it meets all of the criteria and it was just a pleasure listening to folks connection with Cheeseman and the entire area there. Madam Secretary, roll call, please. Hi. I Cashman. I can eat. I. Okay. Good. I. Sandoval. I think Sawyer. I am. Torres. I am black. I. CdeBaca. I. Clark. I. When I. Heard it. I. Madam President. I. Madam Secretary, please close the voting and announce the results. 13 nine. 13 Eyes Council Bill 929 has passed. Next up on our agenda is the mayor's proposed 2021 budget. The public hearing for the mayor's proposed 2021 budget is open. May we have the staff report, please? And we have Stephanie Adams here with us.

Recommendation to adopt resolution calling for the placement of a General Tax Measure on the Ballot of the March 3, 2020 Special Municipal Election for submission to the qualified voters of the City of Long Beach an amended ordinance to extend and adjust the rate of a Transactions and Use Tax, and making findings of fiscal emergency pursuant to California Proposition 218;

LongBeachCC_07162019_19-0678

Six, seven, eight and nine. All right. Okay. Next up will be that motion carries what we're now doing. Item 30, please. Communication from city attorney recommendation to adopt a resolution calling for the placement of a general tax measure on the ballot for the of the March 3rd, 2020 special municipal election to extend and adjust the rate of transaction and use tax and making findings of fiscal emergency pursuant to California's Proposition to 18, adopt a resolution providing for the filing of primary and rebuttal arguments and adopt a resolution requesting the Board of Supervisors to consolidate a special municipal election for one local initiative measure to be held on March 3rd, 2020, with the statewide primary. Okay, thank you. There is. And we have it unless there's any objection. We want to hear the staff report again from last week and no one's less. A customer wants to hear it again. I think we just go and go to the second vote. So why don't we go ahead and if the public comment on this item. Casey to members of the public. I'm going to close the speakers list. After these two three members of the public. And then I will close the speakers list. Okay. Thank you, sir. Jim Foster, president of the Long Beach Post. I come before you again to give my full support for this measure, really on five different levels for us staffing, equipment, facilities, technology and our mission and our mission being a community hospital and all the services that it provides not just to us but to fire . Also, the staff report last week was fantastic. It describes a number of staffing positions that we will lose as a result of the loss of measure. It impacts us on multiple levels in each of your districts. The equipment that we're getting with body cameras, the radio systems that we have to have our facilities with specifically for me is the academy, which needs some desperate help. Our technology, which is coming in droves from the state and unfunded mandates of things that we have to do to accomplish, in fact, a requirement from the federal government that provides some compliance with our technology systems that we have to do. These are all items that the community benefits from. In fact, I can't think in my history here of any other measure that where the taxpayers got more bang for their buck and just things they can touch and hold and see and feel the impact of where these tax dollars are going. So again, I encourage your vote on this. I think this is a great event for the community, really, something they can celebrate in the future to see all of the benefits they gain from these dollars being spent. So thank you, sir. Thank you very much, Mr. Foster. Next speaker, please. Get my notes here. My name is Randall Chesky. My address is on record with the city clerk. I'm here. Thank you for having me. Honorable Mayor and City Council. I was actually here for another item, but this. Was very much related to what I was here. For. I am speaking on behalf of the permanent extension of this, the measure A This provides essential resources to many of our infrastructure improvements, our parks or recreational activities or libraries, and provides very important funds for making making repair, necessary repairs, improvements. It's essential resource for when we're looking at grants outside of our general fund, when we're looking for local dollars. To make competitive. Applications, whether it is for parks, whether it is for a street. Improvement at the federal, state, local. Level. So I encourage you to continue with this resource. It allows our our departments to. Better. Plan and make strategic investments for improvements, whether it is for MacArthur Park or I think there is another park plan ahead of you on this agenda. These are really important resources. I do encourage you to continue supporting it. Thank you. Thank you. Roski. In our last speaker. Rex Pritchard, President, Long Beach Firefighters Association. I can't thank you enough for staff council and the mayor and bringing this item forward and making this measure permanent. I echo the same sentiment President Foster had with the poet. This is vital for all of us. Now, as you drive through Long Beach, you see the improvements that are being made with measure, whether it's the restoration of Engine eight, Rescue 12, homeless engagement. In response, our Hart team the countless. Every budget this council has brought forward has been restoring public safety resources. And this council has been very responsible in using and spending those dollars. This is a proactive approach of keeping Long Beach dollars in Long Beach. And for those people who may not be supportive of this and some of the naysayers out there, and a year from now, they are going to be coming back saying thank you in bringing this forward, because if this council wasn't acting in the fashion they are and getting ahead of this, there will be other governmental agencies who are going to take these sales back, sales tax dollars that we're paying now, and they're going to get moved to another agency outside of Long Beach. This is a proactive approach and ensuring Long Beach Dollar stay in Long Beach. And I am just thankful that you are bringing this forward and I encourage our residents to vote for this because this is going to be vital in everything that is going on. You drive down 15th Street in seeing what is going on, on 15th Street, everything that's going on on the east side. And the most important thing, community hospital, that is a vital, vital part of the 911 system that we need to have your Long Beach firefighters and paramedics and EMTs as we are driving East Side residents all the way to memorial across town. Community hospital is vitally important to the nine 1 to 1 system. It's part of our team. So thank you for bringing this forward. And we look forward to the residents making this permanent. Thank you. Thank you very much. That concludes public comment. Councilman Richardson. No. Vice-Chair Andrews. Yes. I just want to say a lot of individuals, I especially when you have your two heads here, come and speak on something so important. When we talk about infrastructure and we have a person from the community letting you know that our our money that's going into $8 is just showing you what they do in the community. A lot of people ask, what is all this construction going on? That is your taxpayers money at work? And I just want to thank everyone for just letting you know that what you're doing. Don't think that we're just taking your money and just running away with it. We're doing things with Measure eight is a reason for that. And I want to thank our public for voting on that measure. Thank you very much, Mayor. Thank you very much. Councilman Price. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I do have a question. I know that when we voted on measure the last time I'm putting it on the ballot, we had a resolution. Can staff give me an insight into whether or not we'll be amending that resolution to include community hospital and when that will happen? Mr. MODICA Yes, Councilmember, you're correct. There's a number of actions that you take. The ones right now we're doing this the same way we did measure, which is you're putting this agenda, this on the ballot, and then there will be a second resolution that is the intent to spend. And so if we get direction tonight for this to go on the ballot and one of the staff recommendations was to include community hospital, we would bring back that resolution to the council at a later date. And like we and it has been set yet maybe a month or two. Okay. And the other question that I had is, will we continue to have an oversight committee to ensure that expenditures are consistent with the intent of the council and consistent with the resolution that will be adopted in the future? Absolutely. That has not changed. They've met ten times already in the past three years, and every single year they not only review and give us give us input, but they also take actions and votes to make sure that when we are proposing that to you in the budget and you adopted, that those are consistent with the resolution . They actually have their next meeting already scheduled for August 29th, and we're going to continue those meetings. Okay. That's great. Thank you, Mr. Moto. So I do have a couple of comments that I want to share. Um, I'm going to be supporting this item tonight, and one of the multiple reasons why I'm going to be supporting this item tonight, first and foremost, is going to be our need to contribute our portion to the reopening of community hospital. That is a new development since the passage of Measure H that the east side of Long Beach has now to deal with. We know that we had 27,200 emergency services. Consumer prices. Have increased. Yes. We we lost you there for about 10 seconds, but you're back on. Okay. So ambulance transportation times have increased 10% since community hospital closed. We know that in order to reopen the facility, we are going to need to be involved in a cost sharing with the network provider and we need to make sure that we have funding in place for that. As we move forward with those discussions and that process, which itself is a very lengthy and multiple regulatory agency involved process, and so we need to have that funding set aside and a plan in place of how we're going to continue to meet our responsibility as a partner in the endeavor to reopen the hospital in 2016. When the voters approved Measure A. One of the biggest concerns that my constituents shared with me was that we were going to be having the highest sales tax in the city of Long Beach as compared to cities within the region. And at the time, what I shared with my residents and something that I'll continue to share today is that, you know, we're looking at as well, we're talking about our sales tax measures, our sales tax numbers. We're looking at a point in time. If you look at what's going on throughout the state of California, the challenges and opportunities that have been presented to the various municipalities throughout the state, it's not surprising to see that sales tax numbers have changed not just since 2015, but that the trend is that they're continuing to change. In fact, in looking at the cities in the region that have a 10.25%, we've got Burbank, Compton, Covina, kind of. Hey, Culver City, Glendale, Glendora, Hawthorne, Lawndale, Monrovia, Pasadena, Pico Rivera, Pomona, Santa monica and South Gate. These are all cities within the region that have the same sales tax measures that we do. And the reason for that is because they have a lot of the same opportunities and challenges that we're seeing with our budget and with the the the needs of the community. I think one of the key factors for me in deciding to support this was that because state law places the total cap on sales tax at 10.25% for local taxes, an extension of Measure A, we need to take that cap into account. The proposed extension would levy a point 75% tax from 2023 to 2027. Then when Measure H expires in 2027, that rate would be 1%, the same amount levied from 2017 to 2023. We know that there are other government agencies considering sales tax ballot measures, which is an act that would use up to 0.25% remaining under the cap after 2023. So the sales tax rate in Long Beach after 2023 would continue to be 10.25. But the 2.25% increase would not be spent locally. And that's a huge, huge consideration for me. We have restored a lot of services in terms of public safety. For me, that's key. The fact that we're going to be able to finally have a body worn camera program in the city of Long Beach is it's just so long overdue. I cannot say enough about the need for us to include that technology in our current policing model. The fact that we don't have it right now is disappointing to me. And the fact that we are going to have it is very for me, it's a very positive step in the right direction. So for me, the fact that we have restored Engine eight and multiple other fire resources throughout the city, the fact that we've continued to add police officers every year and fire resources has been a tremendous benefit to my resident. You know, one of the things that the residents tell me all the time is we need more police officers, we need more police officers to address the issues we're dealing with, with a lot of the homeless unintended consequences of homelessness that we're seeing. And what I tell residents all the time is, you know, this is homelessness is not an issue. That is a police that has a police solution attached to it. Enforcement is not the solution. But I do know that it gives at least the residents in my district a lot of comfort to know that police officers are out there, ensuring that people are offered services and ensuring that people are held accountable when they violate the rights of others, whether that's in the form of theft, whether it's in the form of quality of life type crime. And so seeing more police officers out there patrolling the streets, seeing more police officers be proactive in enforcement action, has been something that has been very positive in my district. And we cannot we absolutely cannot afford to go backwards in terms of our resources. We need to ensure that we maintain the resources that we have restored. And finally, I mean, when I took office in 2014, we were paving about two strips per year in each district. It was very, very depressing to go to a community meeting and tell them that no streets in that neighborhood were going to be getting paved that year. It was great if the community meeting that you were at happened to be one of the ones where the streets that are getting repaved situated in. But for the for me, there's 21 community organizations in the third district. So we were able to pave one or two streets per year, which which meant that somewhere between, you know, 19 to 28 community organizations, there was no good news to share. That has changed a lot since the passage of Measure eight. We've been able to pave so many streets and address a lot of immediate needs in terms of street repair that we were not able to do before. Of course, I hope that measure funding in in the future is used for alleys and sidewalks throughout the city. I do not believe that it is fair to persistently tell residents that they're going to have to wait on alleys because there are alleys and worse conditions, because I do believe that we need to figure out a way to allocate that infrastructure money equally throughout the city so that every district and every resident feels the benefits of the measure. $8 in their neighborhood. And so for me, making sure that alleys throughout the city are given priority is important, because I understand that the condition of alleys is very much something to be evaluated in perspective. But when you have an alley with multiple potholes and flooding, it's hard for you to say, Well, you know what , I'm going to drive through this flooding and I'm going to drive through these potholes every day because there are dirt alleys that need more attention than than my alley. While I understand that concept, that sounds fair. I think people have a hard time supporting attacks, as they should, when they're not seeing the immediate benefits of it. So that's one area where I hope that the resolution will include equitable distribution of funds for alleys and sidewalks. With that, I thank my colleagues for indulging me and allowing me to share my comments on this very important issue. This is an issue that I have received a lot of feedback from my residents on. I am a broad currently, but it was important to me to weigh in on this issue so that the record is clear in terms of my desire to continue to maintain the resources that we have restored and to do whatever we can possible to ensure that our contribution to the reopening of community hospital is secured in the form of a future revenue projection. Thank you very much. Thank you very much, Councilwoman. Let me let me just cut to close. Let me just add, I want to just first thank the staff and the attorneys. I know you've all worked very hard on getting this. I particularly want to thank Amy Webber from your team, Mr. City attorney, who's just a superstar and your office and consistently does a great job. Can we just give her a round of applause? Because, see, this stuff is actually it's a lot of hard work. And, and she does a really great job for you and your team. Mr. City Attorney So I just wanted to thank her. I also want to thank our our departments, I think particularly on police and fire and public works. You have all been great stewards of some of these resources in the past and what we've done, including the other departments that have seen the benefits and we know that will continue. And so just excellent work and we look forward to ensuring that these resources stay in Long Beach and don't go to other outside agencies. And I think that's critical for us moving forward. And so thank you for to all for for moving this forward. So with that, I'm going to do the roll call vote. Before we get started, could Amy stand up about 20 minutes and speak to us? Thank you. Thank you, Miss Weber. And so with that, let me let me go into the roll call vote. So District two, District three. I. District four i. District five I. District six. District seven i. District eight. And District nine. Thank you. Motion carries. Thank you for for passing that. And we will be moving on to the next item, which is going to be item 41.

A bill for an ordinance approving the 3015 East Colfax Urban Redevelopment Plan, the creation of the 3015 East Colfax Urban Redevelopment Area and the 3015 East Colfax Street Property Tax Increment Area and Sales Tax Increment Area. Approves the 3015 East Colfax Urban Redevelopment Plan and authorizes the creation of an Urban Redevelopment Area and sales and property tax increment areas in Council District 9. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 5-24-22.

DenverCityCouncil_06062022_22-0589

I. Madam Secretary closed the voting and announced results one night. An ICE and ICE resolution's 20 2-603 and 22 604 have passed. Madam Secretary, would you please put the next item on our screens? Council members say to Barca, Would you please put bills 589 and 590 on the floor for publication? Yes, I move that council bills 22, dash five, 89 and 590. We ordered published in a block. Thank you. We have a motion and a second comments by members of council. Council member Sayed Ibaka. Thank you. I've called this item out for a vote. It's early. It's first reading. There were a lot of questions in committee and since our committee meeting, I've had several community members reaching out and letting me know that they did not want me to support this. And I am honoring that request and voting no on first reading. Thank you. Council members say the baka see no other members in the queue. Madam Secretary, roll call on council bills 22, dash five, 89 and 20 2-5 90, please. CdeBaca no. Flynn I. Herndon. High Kenny Ortega I. Sandoval I. Sawyer I. Torres, I. Black I. Madam President. I. Madam Secretary, close the voting and announce results. One May ten Eyes. Ten Eyes Council Bells 20 2-5, 89 and 20 2-5 90 have been ordered published. Madam Secretary, please put the next item on item on our screens. Council members say to Barca, Will you please put bills for 71 and for 75 on the floor to take out of order?

Recommendation to adopt resolution declaring a shelter crisis; suspending applicable provisions of local law, including those contained in the City's zoning ordinances and regulations; and, authorizing the operation of a winter shelter between the dates of December 7,2016 and March 6, 2017, inclusive; Authorize City Manager to execute any and all documents necessary for a Lease between Eddie N. John #1, a limited liability company, and the City, and a Sublease between the City and First to Serve, Inc., a California nonprofit organization, and any necessary amendments, at the discretion of the City Manager, for approximately 12,000 rentable square feet of industrial space at 6845 Atlantic Avenue, at the monthly base rent of $6,750 plus utilities and incidental costs for use as a winter shelter; and Increase appropriations in the General Fund (GF) in the Health and Human Services Department (HE) by $20,250. (District 9)

LongBeachCC_12062016_16-1089

Motion carries. Him. Item 30 Report from Health and Human Services and Economic and Property Development. Recommendation to adopt resolution declaring a shelter crisis for the operation of a winter shelter between the dates of December 7th, 2016 and March six, 2017. Inclusive and authorize the city manager to execute a lease and sublease for 12,000 rentable square feet of industrial space at 6845 Atlantic Avenue District nine. Okay, there's a motion and a second and if any public comment. Saying that public comment staff are you putting out staff? Okay. Okay. Kelly Colby. So that the person that we are, the organization will be running the winter shelter this year. Is called. First to Serve. In the past, we've had a Long Beach rescue mission. We'll be opening the shelter in the next couple of weeks. We're working with the provider to make sure that it. Is safe and ready and then it will end on March. 1st. And that's my staff report. I know, for questions. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. We're good. Now, you know. Thank you. It's a long night. I'm gonna start singing in a minute. Next item. Need a vote on item three, please. Let's take a vote. Any public comment first? Nope.

Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all necessary documents with the LA84 Foundation to accept Learn to Swim 2022 grant funds in the amount of $15,000, for summer aquatics programs targeting economically disadvantaged youth at Belmont Plaza Temporary Pool, Silverado Pool, and Martin Luther King, Jr. Pool, from July 6, 2022 through August 26, 2022; and, execute all necessary documents to implement and administer the grant including any amendments. (Districts 3,6,7)

LongBeachCC_07052022_22-0741

District nine. High. The motion is carry. Thank you. Items now. Item 16, please. Thank you. So read the item 16, please. Item 16 is a report from Parks, Recreation and Marine recommendation to authorize City Manager to execute all necessary document with L.A. 84 Foundation to Accept Learn to Swim 2022 Grant funds in the amount of 15,000 for summer aquatic programs targeting economically disadvantaged youth at Belmont Plaza, temporary pool, silver pool and Martin Luther King Junior Pool from July six, 2022 through August 26, 2022, two, six, three, six and eight. Thank you, Councilman Toro. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just first want to thank L.A. 84 Foundation for providing the funds for the three pool, particularly the Martin Luther King Jr. Pool. I just had a question about this because, you know, about a few months ago, Long Beach, six district residents and leaders just walked through the the pool with the city staff and found that the pool and the area to be in terrible condition. So and right away staff took action and is going through a renovation process but I wanted to make sure we got clarification of that's going to affect what is that renovation timeline and how is that going to affect the programs for this pool? Eric Lopez. Thank you, Tom. Councilwoman So we're we're doing see some of the repairs that we can do now. We can do fast that hab and that will have minimal impact on on the on the users of the poor. So we're going to be doing plumbing repairs, painting the cleaning of floors and other areas. We're going to be just there's a series of other improvements that we have planned, but they will not impact the actual operation of the pool. We will need to come back either in the fall and winter to do more improvements. That will be more impactful. But we will we will have time to plan those out, and it won't happen during the busy summer, summer season. So we'll be able to plan those out. But the current summer programing will not be impacted by our improvement plan. Great. Thank you so much for clarifying that. Thank you. Can I get a second on this motion, please? There's emotion and a second is really certain. Thank you. I'm happy to take in the motion. Just a quick question. So I see the three city pools are included here in North Long Beach. We've typically used Jordan High School through the Joint Use Agreement. Was it not included in the application for this program? It is. Brant is on the line. Do we have him available? Yeah. Tom, this is Brian here. I also have Ted Stevens, who oversees our aquatics program, which would include the swim program. My recollection, though, the grant application, because of its funding limit, we've historically just applied for our three pools, although I would say in the future, because we're really working closely with Long Beach Unified School District to improve our joint use agreements. And I know they're renovating all of their high school pools and updating them. So there are some greater opportunities in the future. But for this coming summer, which actually starts tomorrow and runs through the final Friday in August, that will be our summer swim program for Kings, Silverado and Belmont. Thanks, Brian. I would just say, you know, I know that we don't have our pool in North Lombard yet. We will have one someday. But the joint use that Jordan is is available to us. So as we apply for grants, we should keep that in mind because, you know, a fifth of the city's youth live in the 925 zip code. Thanks a lot. Good boy. Thank you, ma'am. Thank you. Is there any public comment on this item? If there are any members of the public that would like to speak on item 16 in person, please line up at the podium in Zoom. Please use the raise hand feature or dial starting nine now. First, I want to thank, um, Councilman Sorrells, successful office as well as L.A. 84, for this opportunity to peer together. I think it's great that the surplus money from the Olympics, the only Olympics to ever be profitable, is still positively impacting the lives of children in Southern California. In the meeting that our councilman just referenced, which I was present and, um, you know, one of the things we brought up to um, Mr. Dennis were relation to the pool was that there's an issue with capacity and space for children in the neighborhood. Um, currently my pool is, uh, and a temporary pool. And so there's a shuttle process between the children and elderly in the Belmont area to the Kings Park pool. I was just there over the weekend and witnessed it with my own eyes as I brought some of my seniors in the neighborhood to the pool where there's a space capacity. And so I'm just curious what relation to this funding. How is it that we're going to be able to impact the lives and target specifically economically disadvantaged youth if the economically disadvantaged youth that live in the neighborhood are still unable to use the pool during the busiest time of the year due to, um, you know , the swim, uh, spots being taken up by people outside the sixth district. I can't speak for relation to Silverado. Um, but I did bring it up to the Director of Parks that the people from our neighborhood in the Kings Park area are told by staff at the pool that they should go to Silverado Park to swim. So I'm hoping that if we're going to be getting some of this money, that we can somehow prioritize or make some type of quota system for residents in the area rather than, uh, continually being directed to go to a pool on the west side. Thank you. That concludes public comment. Members, please go out and do the roll call vote. Mr. Gunn. District nine, District two I. District three I. District four, District five i. District six. District six. I. District seven. I. District eight. District nine. I. The motion is carry. Thank you. I'm not going to turn this over to. Actually, we do have some fun transfer items, I believe. Right. So let's go and do the fun transfer consent items. Think are 23, three, 26, 37, 340. If I get a motion and a second for all those and let's read those please, Madam Quirk into the record.

Recommendation to receive and file report on the new system for tracking commission appointments and receiving commission applications.

LongBeachCC_10072014_14-0813

Okay. Thank you. Now we're moving on to the regular agenda. We'll start with item number nine. An item an item number nine is a recommendation to receive and file a report that from my office. So I'll introduce this this item and then we'll we'll get started with it. I want to take us back to our retreat. We one of the items that we discussed was the importance of ensuring that we have a transparent and innovative tracking solution for our commission application process and commission system. We all know that our city commissions are an important part of our local democracy. The men, women, and in many cases teenagers that serve on these commissions do so because they love their city. They're committed to the community, and we expect them to do great work, which they do, and in turn, they expect to be part of this democratic process. I think that the commissions and those that have served have served the city well. We discuss the how the commission process up to this point has been done on a paper system and it has been quite antiquated. And so I'm going to we're going to briefly present to you the the final product of the new commission system will be launching this tomorrow. And then soon after that, there will be opportunities for the what we call the back end piece, which is the dashboard for the council members to go into that system and then begin to look at data and information that that's available to them as well, which will also be available to the public . So to just walk everyone through the commission process briefly, we have Devin Cotter who worked on this project with the city clerk, and I want to thank the city clerk for the incredible work. This they had to go back and manually put in all of the history of our commissions into the system as well as get us up to date. So so thank you all for the hard work. And I'll turn this over to Devin Cotter. Mr. Cotter Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Good evening, counsel. And so on. The projection behind you, we have the first part, which is the boards and commissions application or actually sorry, the listing of all the different boards and commissions for the city. And this is going to be the new porthole for the public to be able to gain access and information. And so what we have here is, you know, a nice listing of all the city's current commissions and a brief description and what's going to be you know, what's great about this is that every point there's an apply button so that you can jump in. There's also a listing of all the vacancies in every single commission. So that way someone can know which positions have vacancies and which ones don't, and, you know when they can apply. They also have listings for some of them and seem to be all of them of the criteria for that position. So if there's a council office who the appointing authority is and you know, when those what those terms are. But going back to the the list of boards, what this does is it consolidates a few different points of information in the old system from, you know, where they meet, when they meet and how to apply. So if we look at, say, the airport commission, we have the fact that there's one current vacancy, we have their terms , the term limits, and then we also have, you know, minutes and agendas and agendas. So if you're interested in what's going on in the commission, you get a link in this pool, pull up all the records that are available currently online. So the airport commission is great because they also upload the video. So you've got the video of the minutes and the agendas and information on the next meeting. And then of course, the big part that's going to be helpful for us is applying for a board. And this takes you to a new online application. And this also simplifies the process because instead of having multiple copies of paper applications, maybe one going to the council members office, one going to the mayor's office, one going to the clerk's office. They now are all centrally located on the system. We have, you know, basic information, including in their name and whatnot. What's nice is that they, you know, enter in their council district. So we know exactly, you know, who we wanted to get a recommendation from and all that. And unlike the paper applications, unified multiple boards at once, it indicates which ones are available. And you have spaces there highlighted in blue, which ones don't. But even if it's if there isn't a vacancy, you can still apply in the application will be kept on file. And then once someone does, you know, finish their application, they have the option of then saving it, printing it out, or going ahead and submitting it. And once it's submitted, it's automatically emailed to the mayor's office in the clerk's office for follow up. And you I have to say that the the amount of work that the clerk's staff did to help get this up to speed was fantastic. And I really appreciate their help with this. And and also, you know, we've got information on current board members. So if you're interested in, you know, who's serving on the board, you can get information on when they how long they've been serving and information such as, you know, which council district they reside in. So this will be going live tomorrow and moving forward if a council office has questions about, oh, who's applying for my district, who's currently serving for my district, you know, who's applied to this commission? It's going to be a much quicker, easier process to then produce a packet of applicants that can then go to each council office and then also before the council if they get appointed. So quickly, Mr. Carter. Thank you. And what allowed in addition to that is this this is this will be certainly incredibly transparent and open for the public as well. And so the public will have all this access to to look at who's who serving on our commissions, how to contact commission staff, what district they're in. And there'll be demographic information and we'll be able to very easily produce reports. And so the idea beginning tomorrow is if a council requests any type of report on who the commissioners are or how long they're serving. Mr. Carter will be able to produce that or our office working with the clerk's office so that it's it's done in a way that's it's organized and efficient. And the last piece also add to this is this is really, I think as a city, we want to move in a way that's innovative and that embraces technology, I think is one way of ensuring that we that we keep really a positive conversation about and encourage encouraging civic innovation . I think this was just a small example of doing that. So I want to thank I want to thank Mr. Cotter and the city clerk and his staff for for all the work that went into this. We appreciate that. And so with that, Councilmember Andrews. Yes, I want to thank the mayor also, because I think this is a great idea and updating our system will, you know, keep our residents informed on the commission application process and as well engaging the residents, you know, to be engaged. And I think this is a great job that the mayor went and did. Thank you very much. You council Councilwoman Price. I want to echo that sentiment and thank the mayor's office for bringing this this program to us and thank Devin for the hard work. I know he's been working really diligently on getting this program updated and to the point where we can actually use it. I think one of the observations that I've had with the city is that sometimes it takes a long time for commissions to be filled and we have a lot of people who are interested but lose patience when that process takes a long time. So I want to thank the mayor for being progressive and bringing this new technology to the city. It was long overdue. I'm looking forward to taking advantage of it as we help recommend people from the third district to fill some of those vacancies. So thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Councilwoman Mongo. I too am excited about this innovative application and I look forward to seeing the citizen engagement. We often hear constituents say, I want to be involved, I want to serve my community, and this makes for a very transparent and open process that everyone has equal access to. And I think it really speaks to what we've said we would do as a council. And thank you for your leadership from the mayor's office. Thank you, Councilmember Austin. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I'd also like to commend you and your staff for helping to streamline the commission application process. As a former city commissioner, somebody who went through that process several years ago, I can tell you that this is this is much more transparent. This is a much easier and user friendly process for our residents, and I think it's going to be a great hit. There was one question that I did have of I guess, Devin is do we know who's in the queue or how many applications are on file? What is that information available as well? Mr. CARTER We were still, you know, up until tomorrow using the old paper system. So of course we can, you know, produce that report. But once this new system is in place, it will be a instantly generated packet. So you could request, you know, who's every applicant for city y, you can request a report on for a specific commission or from, you know, say, the people residing in your council district. So it'll be a much quicker and easier system. And one of the other things, too, is that if there is a council district requirement, say it's a seat for the eighth district that'll be present on the site so that instead of getting a call either to your office or to the mayor's office for oh, I'd like to apply for this commission only to find out that , you know, they don't have a spot for an eighth District resident. That'll be apparent from the beginning. Thank you, Councilman Richardson. Congratulations, Mayor and Devon, on pulling this together. I think this is going to make our government much easier for folks to get involved in. And I look forward to seeing some of those reports on the back end. This is really exciting. It reminds me of some of the some of those platforms that are already out there, Nation Builder and all those database programs. This is this is a really exciting I would imagine there's going to be a flood of new applicants now that this process is so clean and transparent and open. Q And I believe Mr. Carter is going to produce an initial report for everyone. So you all have the kind of the new kind of where we're at currently, and then what's what's it moving forward? Councilwoman Gonzalez. I just want to say thank you as well. I know it's a lot of hard work put into this and we're finally moving into an age where this is really important. And it also gives us a profile as the city as to how we're doing, you know, with our with our appointments and demographics and everything like that . So do I just had a couple questions. So the term is that on every single applicant, you'll will be able to see the term and how long they've been a commissioner. Mr.. Carter Yeah. So for every single sitting board. Commissioner Fine. So this mess is a little unwieldy. You can look up every single current commissioner and it'll have their terms and then you can, you know, go also go by the board itself and see, you know, who's served for how long or, you know, when the terms are up . Okay. Great. Thank you. Great work. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Arango. I want to echo Cory, all the comments have been made regarding this issue. I mean, it's wonderful application. We've been not bombarded, but we've been asked quite frequently about what are some vacancies out there in the interest. And I really do appreciate the fact that there's going to be multiple possibilities of getting not only considered for one commission, but also for another. And it's not a re a recent middle of an application one after another. It really seems like it streamlines it. And I'll beat an old and old guy and not always computer savvy as to what's going on here. I hope that there's an education piece behind this. For those of us who are technologically challenged and being able to access the application process for our for commissions, I know that's something that I will have to do with through my office as well. We'll be sending out some information to our constituents regarding the application process. It's new and it changes, streamlined and much more effective than what it used to be. But in the long run, I want to thank you and staff for putting this together. Thank you. And also customary ringa. If there are those that don't have access to computer or still want to do the paper version, I will still take paper versions. And then what will do the inputting on the other side? Okay. See any public comment on the item? Okay. See none again. Thank you all. It's going to be a great system launch. And if someone can make a motion to receive and file a report card, there's been a motion by Councilmember Andrews and a second by Council Brosnan. No public comment on the item. With that, please cast your votes to receive and file. Motion carries eight zero. Thank you. I don't know. Ten. Communication for Mayor Garcia. Recommendation to cancel the City Council meeting of November four, 2014 due to the general election.

Recommendation to conduct a Budget Hearing to receive and discuss an Overview of the Proposed Fiscal Year 2015 Budget for the following: Department of Health and Human Services, Public Works Department, and Water Department.

LongBeachCC_08192014_14-0580

Thank you, Mary Garcia. The recommendations conduct a budget hearing on the 2015 budgets for the Departments of Health and Human Services, Public Works and the Water Department. Before I turn this over to Mr. West, we'll do this in the same format. We've done the other budget hearings. Mr. WEST. We'll go through we'll go through all the all the departments, and then we'll bring it back to the two questions for council, and then we'll open it up to the public. Mr. West Mayor, Councilmembers. This is just another one of our budget hearings regarding showcasing some of our departments. Tonight, you're going to hear from our Health and Human Services Department, our public works department and our water department. Our first stop is going to be the Health and Human Services Department with Director Kelly Collopy. If you could remove the slide. We wanted to highlight that. Originally, we attempt to have like Parks and Recreation, Library and Health and Human Services along with P.D. and Fire, because we considered these departments very tight with our public safety continuum. So we just want to know and let you know that Health and Human Services the department are going to hear from tonight. We're very, very, very closely with all aspects of PD and fire specifically and keeping people healthy, providing affordable housing in some cases, adding our Section eight certificates. They do, I believe, 7000 units a year serving 20,000 people in poverty. And in addition to that, our homeless population. So they're very, very important with our public safety continuum, working with PD and Fire. So with that, I'm going to turn it over to Kelly. Good evening, honorable mayor and city council members. Thank you for this opportunity to share the Health and Human Services Department budget and priorities. We are one of the three city health jurisdictions in California with Pasadena and Berkeley. We are one of the lucky few with an account within a county of 10 million people. You have a department whose sole focus is to coordinate over $116 million from outside sources, bringing best practice, innovative services and over 300 employees committed to improving the health of your city. It allows for local focus and local control of resources to support city goals and meet city needs. In addition, we are in a place to coordinate the many departments and services from Los Angeles County in a more integrated approach locally and in coordination with our local nonprofits and health care system. The Health and Human Services Department is a key player in the overall continuum of public safety in the city and considered one of the three legs of the emergency response triangle in partnership with police and fire. We work closely with city staff on emergency preparedness and response to ensure the public safety of our residents. We actively engage community members in preventing the spread of disease through public education workshops, clinical lab services and responding to natural and man made disasters. As a recognized health jurisdiction in the state, in partnership with the CDC and other California health departments, we are the key surveillance information and prevention hub for infectious diseases that can affect the health and safety of Long Beach residents. Our day to day Health and Human Services programing directly impacts the quality of life and public safety of the city of Long Beach. We address health through the lifespan from before birth until death. Creating opportunities for healthier families and neighborhood environments by increasing access to health opportunities. In addition, we work collaboratively with various departments and community partners to create an integrated health systems approach to provide a wide array of services. Our core services are promoting and encouraging healthy, active living through health, education, immunizations, testing and treatment programs for families and their children and services to seniors to improve the quality of life. We ensure safe, physical environments by testing the city's recreational waters, doing restaurant inspections and training, hearing, load testing, mosquito abatement, disease surveillance and prevention and emergency and disaster preparedness and response. We also improve access to healthy, active living by supporting families with housing assistance, outreaching to homeless populations for housing placement and supportive services, expanding community gardens and neighborhood fitness zones, and expanding health coverage to the underinsured and the uninsured. Our accomplishments this year. We have over 30 programs and many accomplishments. So this is just a sample of the many things that we've achieved this year. First of all, we provided safe and affordable housing to approximately 21,000 residents and nearly 7000 units in the city of Long Beach. We were recognized in the American Diabetes Association Education Program. The city of Long Beach as highly impacted by diabetes, with over 42,000 people in Long Beach having been diagnosed with diabetes and many more are undiagnosed . One in three hospitalizations are due to diabetes. Our department provides diabetes education in English and Spanish in a six weeks program. This recognition indicates we are a best practice site and we'll be working very closely with our health care providers as referrals so that we can support their patients and helping them manage their diabetes. We expanded access to nutrition and exercise citywide by reaching nearly 25,000 youth and their parents through programs such as Long Beach, Junior Runners, the Junior Champions Program, Harvest of the Month and Kill Zone in North Long Beach. We saw a reduction in infant mortality by 44% over ten years. This dramatic decline is as a result of the health department and their partners across all sectors. Our community working together to ensure that mothers have access to healthy food, engage in physical activity, and are linked to care and social services programs in the Health Department, including Nurse Family Partnerships, our work program and Black Infant Health. Among many, we were able to reduce the tobacco access rate among youth from 36% in 2009 to 7.8%, the lowest in history. This is done by the Health Department or the Environmental Health Bureau conducts routine inspections to ensure compliance with tobacco laws. We conducted 493 last year and we implement tobacco decoy operations where teenagers go in and try and buy tobacco products. And if they do sell them, then they're cited. We also provided over 23,000 clinical visits at the Health Department, and these include family planning, STD, HIV, tuberculosis and immunizations. We delivered nearly 18,000 immunizations last year, many of them free or at a reduced cost. And finally, it's not on the slide, but we held a public health conference this past year for over 400 people who are engaged in serving the health of our community. It was a huge hit, and we received a national award for our social media campaign, which highlighted our city's innovative use of technology. I proposed budget. Our budget is about $717 million of that. 77 million of it goes to housing authority to support low income housing in the community. It goes through housing vouchers. 38 million of it is from the health fund that the health fund is made up of re-alignment funds, which is vehicle licensing fees and sales tax, other fees and grants. About less than 1% of our department's budget comes from general fund. Our major changes for this year in the budget is really a focus on stabilizing our workforce and maximizing our grant funding. Almost all changes in our Health and Human Services budget are health related rather than general fund. A key focus is to ensure we have sufficient staffing to maximize our grant resources that we receive. This includes moving previously part time employees to full time and combining part time and non-career positions to provide full time positions. We realigned two positions to address the impact of Affordable the Affordable Care Act. Last year, nearly 2000 individuals received direct enrollment assistance from our department. We provided education outreach to another thousand individuals in the city. We extended hours and participated on weekends and fairs and an open hours. This extra capacity will help us when enrollment season opens again. The Health Department is also currently going through the National Public Health Accreditation Process, which ensures that our department is engaged in best practice in public health. To assist in this year long effort. We have created a vacant position to lead this effort as well as support ongoing implementation of our five year strategic plan. And finally, we added a chronic homeless initiatives coordinator who will coordinate local and regional entities to mitigate homeless encampment locations, manage the COG Homeless Initiative and the Downtown Homeless Connections Initiative, funded by the Hilton Foundation. This person will also lead the city's effort to track, monitor and respond to chronic homeless. Working with our quality of working with quality of life teams, the Met Teams and the DOJ. The funding for this position will be split between general fund and grant funding and approximately $49,000 each. Our issues and opportunities coming up. I had the opportunity to attend the mayor council retreat over the weekend and to hear about the vision for the city. What you described really is a healthy city. In addition, you focused on collaboration as a mechanism to achieve it. Each of the departments you've heard from so far. Plus Public Works, Development, Service and Workforce have been engaged in collaborative planning to build the health of our city together. We'll also be engaging in conversations and planning with many community partners who are engaged in supporting our city's health. And we look forward to engaging you in this conversation as well. Our Continuum of Care received the unified funding agency status, which will allow for greater flexibility in local resources targeting to address homeless. We are one of only two nationally to receive this designation. The other being Columbus, Ohio. This is seen as a national best practice and they're actually turning to us to help them organize it and figure out how to. Move it forward. Health and wellness. Health and wellness really includes being physically and mentally healthy. We're seeking to expand mental health opportunities in the city through work with new funding sources and partners. In addition, we're working to integrate mental health services into our clinical services to improve the likelihood that people will access them. We've been participating in a pilot with Mental Health America as an integrated service model, and the early results are promising. We're looking to seek we're seeking to continue this model moving forward. Another key issue for us is improving the coordination of local data systems. There are many data systems in many organizations related to health in our city. However, the data are not coordinated and they're not easily accessed across our system. The stymies effective planning and Coordination of Service. The Health Department is planning to implement a common database to track health indicators in the city. In addition, we'll be working closely with our partners to ease data, access for planning, coordination and reporting. In other issues, return is reducing health disparities in our diverse neighborhoods. Research indicates the social determinants of health such as poverty, trauma, safety, education, employment have a significant impact on individuals and communities. In Long Beach, we have neighborhoods who are heavily impacted by social issues that are struggling with their ability to improve their health overall. A key challenge for us with our partners is providing the same opportunity for health in all of our neighborhoods. And finally, identifying sustained funding for our services. 84 7% of our resources come from federal, state and local grants management. Department of Programs. With grant funding as a primary source of revenue is both a science and an art. Thankfully, my staff have both of those skills. While some grants are stable and we've been receiving them for years, others are more project specific with limited time periods. In addition, we are directly impacted by policy and funding changes at all levels of government and sometimes with little notice. While we've learned to be nimble and do our best to maintain staffing and to maintain and grow services, we seek more sustainable funding solutions in the future. So each of our presentations so far have been framed as the public safety continuum, and we're so pleased to be part of it. But I'd say there were also our key players in the health continuum of Long Beach. Physical and behavioral health promotion is a crime reduction strategy. It's an education strategy. It's an employment strategy. Crime reduction, education, employment are also health promotion strategies. They're also closely intertwined, although we tend to talk about them separately. Health, safety, education. Sustainable income, housing in place are keys to success of the people in Long Beach and Brenda one breaks down. The likelihood of success is reduced. When people are physically and mentally healthy, they do better in school, they do better at work, their families do better, and there's less crime involved to achieve a healthy line, which for everyone requires all of us. The partnerships across the city, our long standing, your Health and Human Services Department is a key resource for bringing and coordinating outside funding streams, social service and behavioral health partners, hospitals and other nonprofit agencies to build health and a coordinated strategy with you, our other departments, our communities, and our partners. I know we can achieve our collective vision of a long beach where people are healthy, safe and thriving. I look forward to working with you. This concludes my report and I'm available to respond to any questions you may have. Thank you. So next up, we will have public works with Director R MOYEN. And Mr. City Manager. Just wanted to let councilmembers know. We'll just allow staff to make their presentations and take questions at the end. Thank you. Good evening, Honorable Mayor and City Council. Thank you for the opportunity to provide a brief overview of the public works departments at 515 proposed budget. To put our presentation in context. When residents step out of their homes, businesses open their doors and visitors come to Long Beach, they see public works whether they realize it or not. Every street, sidewalk, traffic, light, storm drain, street sweeper, refuse truck, tree trimmer, graffiti truck or traffic sign and a pothole truck affects the public in one way or another. In order to maintain a structurally balanced operating budget, we focus on core service delivery. It is Public Works mission to maintain and enhance the city's infrastructure and environment for the benefit of the public. The department's five bureaus have very diverse functions, including building and roadway design and construction, infrastructure maintenance, refuse and recycling, stormwater management and real estate services. We envision a better tomorrow by serving and exceeding the expectations of the public through the performance of our valued employees. Although we have very diverse functions, our core services are to provide for and maintain safe and adequate infrastructure for the community, provide for sustainable environmental protection in a positive service environment, and safely and efficiently design, construct, deliver , protect or maintain services for the public facilities public right away and stormwater management. Next. That's why 14 has been a very productive year for public works with the ongoing and one time funding provided by the City Council. Some of our accomplishments are we completed $74 million in capital improvement projects, including libraries, recreational, other buildings, park infrastructure and traffic signals. This includes 5.8 million of sidewalk repairs totaling 22 miles and 34 million in arterial and residential streets, totaling 73 lane miles. We completed the construction of Chaddock Field and or Zumba Park Community Center, installed class, two bike lanes on seven major streets and class three bikes, bike lanes, routes on three major, major streets collected 190,000 tons of trash for residential and commercial accounts swept 155,000 miles of streets and alleys and collected 10,176 tons of materials. Environmental Services Bureau Refuse Diversion Recycling Program has been very successful. Customers generated only £3.7 per person per day, far exceeding the state mandate of reducing the trash generated to a maximum of £7.6 per person per day. We repaired 40,000 potholes. The major and secondary thoroughfares response rate was within three days and local streets and alleys response rate was within 15 days. We responded to and removed 957,000 square feet of graffiti within 24 hours and of being reported trimmed, 26,500 trees removed, 400 tree stumps, and we strive to center lines of miles of city streets, responded to 22,000 facility, 9000 traffic signal and 11,200 go Long Beach and not service requests and completed the 9 million remodel of Pacific Ballroom at the Arena. I would like to add that my regularly scheduled meetings with each one of you has been valuable to maintain constant communication and ensure we're on the track with service delivery . We are having some technical difficulties. Public works overall budget is 145 million. As you can see, we manage a significant number of funds. All briefly mentioned key funds shown on the pie chart, starting at the top and going clockwise. The capital project funds are 4.2 million is primarily for for sidewalks with the balance for pothole repair and bike paths. 44 million is for the refuse collection and contract recycling operations, waste diversion programs and litter free Long Beach Program. Public Works 32.7 million General Fund portion is 8.6% of the city's general fund with offsetting revenue. Our general fund impact is only $7.5 million. The Civic Center Fund of 9.9 million handles the ongoing civic center system, custodial and parking operations, $15.6 million of gas stock Street Improvement Fund. Our money's received from the state for ride away improvements. The transportation fund of 14.6 million includes monies received from the county for transportation purposes. Prop eight for 3 million. Prop C 6.5 million and Measure R points for 4.9 million. Tidelands is primarily for the aquarium and public parking lots, commercial center and PDC permits and compliance and beach parking enforcement. As you know, the stormwater environment is important. Just to provide a little background to this. The city has four major beaches. Each council district generates non stormwater runoff that is transported through street gutters, storm drain pipes, ditches and channels and then two rivers and eventually ending at the beaches. The city of Long Beach is mandated to comply with the Clean Water Act guidelines through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Elimination System Permit, in accordance with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and State Water Resources Control Board. Within the permit, the city is responsible for nine total maximum daily load compliance regulations. Fines totaling from noncompliance with the NYPD's permit can range from 5000 to $10000 per day, a violation. There are 17 participating cities in the three watersheds Lower L.A. River, lower San Gabriel, San Gabriel River and Los Cerritos Channel that contribute additional money for their portion of monitoring plan and watershed management programs. The program directly impacts the quality of life in our rivers and beaches. The 199,000 will fund the Lower L.A. River, Lower San Gabriel River and Los Cerritos Channel. Watershed to handle compliance monitoring. The 451,000 will fund the Greater Los Angeles Long Beach Toxic Pollutants and Los Angeles Liver River Estuary and Long Beach handle as as well as the Alamitos Bay Compliance Monitoring. According to cities and PDS permit, 395,000 and Tidelands funding is to be to develop a citywide master watershed management program and a reasonable assurance analysis which will include the Greater Los Angeles. Long Beach Harbors, Long Beaches and Alamitos Bay. Public Works plays an essential role in maintaining and enhancing the community's quality of life. During the past year, I've taken the opportunity to review our operations and obtain employee feedback on how best to move our department forward. We're looking at ways to restructure service delivery. As mentioned in the mayor's budget, recommendations will look forward to working with employees and the street sweeping division on implementing efficiencies such as reducing the street sweeping time block. The payment management program I initiated is winding down, and we will have a comprehensive report on our street condition shortly. As technology expands, the Long Beach reporting will also impact our resources. Significant strides have been made in the last few years to address the city's aging infrastructure with additional nonrecurring funds. However, it is not anticipated that these non recurring funds will be available at the level in the in the near future. Aging infrastructure is a constant issue facing our city. Our 23 storm drain pump stations are approximately 60 years old and serve service at 380 miles of active stormwater infrastructure, including pipes, open channels, ditches, culverts and drains. Public Works has identified that the storm main pump stations need to be refurbished as they are unable to support the needs . The wide variety of core services public works provides positively affects residents, businesses and visitors within our city. Public Works School is to provide as many of these essential services seamlessly. To put the level of service in perspective. Public works inventory includes 800 miles of streets, 215 miles of alleys, 600 miles of sidewalks, 600 miles of curb and gutter, over 400 public buildings, 145 bridges, 190 miles of storm drains, 23 pump stations, 303,900 catch basins, 95,000 street trees, 180,000 traffic signs, 640 traffic signals, 3300 parking meters and nearly 125,000 refuse and recycling accounts. I take pride in our 421 public works employees that deliver quality, ongoing program and CIP projects on a daily basis. Thank you for your support in the past and I look forward to working with each one of you going forward. This concludes my report. I think you are next is Kevin water with the water apartment and I believe in the audience is the chairman of the water commission. I think. Good evening, Mayor Garcia, members of the Council, thank you for the opportunity to present the water department's budget there. It comes for fiscal year 2015. And I would like to introduce the president of the water commission, Harry Salts gave her. It was right up here with the bright red tie. So it's easy to see. Go ahead. In the water department, we have two separate and distinct funds. The water fund and the sewer funds are there. They're the. It's just as it sounds. The costs of the water fund are provided for by our water fees and the sewer fund. Likewise. So I'll cover the water fund first and then later the sewer fund. The water fund there. You can see on the the pie chart on the left is by far the largest fund. It constitutes about 84% of our budget. And then the sewer fund, about 16%. And then you see the the breakdown of our major components of our water fund. So roughly two thirds of it is non-personal services or operation and maintenance costs. And we'll talk about some of those on the next slide. About 20% is our personnel or personal services budget, and then our capital budget is about 13 million. Really, what's driving what's happening with the water department is really this slide is the key to it. This shows you we get 60% of our water supply from the groundwater basin and 40% of it we buy from the Metropolitan Water District. And what you're seeing here is a chart that shows on the top what the rates we were charged by the Metropolitan Water District have done since 2008 through 2015. And what the the charges that we pay to the water replenishment district for the groundwater that we pump have done, and in both cases, they've gone up 81% over that time period. So the numbers on the top are in dollars per acre foot for those of you that are are trying to follow this. And then the graph on the bottom is in millions of dollars. So you can see and if you look at it, that basically those costs have gone up about $14 million. So while we've absorbed in some cases these 81% increases in costs from the Metropolitan Water District and the the water replenishment district, our rates, including the 4% rate increase we're proposing for 2015, have only gone up 44%. So we've been absorbing many of these costs and have been running a deficit budget for the last few years now. And so we came to the water commission last year into the City Council. And the next slide will show that we couldn't continue to run a deficit budget forever. We've been using reserves to meet this deficit. So last year was the first year of our five year finance plan on our water on our water budget. This chart shows you the remaining four years with fiscal year 15, they're highlighted in yellow. The finance plan essentially accomplishes two objectives. By 2018, it would balance our budget, so it will bring our revenues and expenditures into balance. It's right now unbalanced, as you can see, to the tune of about $7 million deficit budget in 15. And the other thing it would do is it would use our remaining reserves to to smooth those rate increases in. So we what our studies show and what we did this year and what we're proposing, again, in 15 is that with 4% rate increases by 2018, we achieve those two objectives of being in a balanced budget situation and having our reserve level at the 11 to $12 million target, which is what the rating agencies have told us , is the lowest amount that they'd like us to maintain as a as a reserve for our water fund. And so we have assumptions of continuing rate increases from MWD and the water replenishment built into that plan. And of course, if we can be successful at reducing those, then our future rate increases would come down accordingly. But again, this is what's driving our our budget and our rate increases as these increased costs from MWD and the water replenishment district. Moving out of the sewer fund. We have a similar situation there. We were faced with some new regulations about seven years ago that required us and other water utilities or other utilities that operate sanitary sewer systems to greatly expand our sewer activities, both in terms of maintenance, cleaning, inspection and capital investment. And so we've been doing that now for the last seven years or so. So there you see the sewer budget broken down again. It's heavy on O&M or non-personal services. And about a $4 million or about a 20% of our sewer fund goes towards capital improvement programs. Go ahead. The situation we're facing with the sewer system is so we've been in spending this additional money for the last several years now out of a line of credit, we took $20 million , line of credit we opened several years ago. Now we've been able to extend that twice. It's a very low interest, a line of credit we wish we could continue forever, but it is going to expire in 2017. And so that's what's planned for here is in 2017 to retire that outstanding, outstanding line of credit and convert it to a regular long term debt issuance where we'll have to be paying both principal and interest. So that's why you see a fairly large increase in our expenditures as we go from 2016 to 2017, almost $1,000,000 in increase as we start making principal payments on that line of credit after we convert it. And again, we've got nominal increases assumed in our budget. And then again, what you see here is, is that by 2019, we again would achieve a balanced budget, our revenues and expenditures would be in balance and our reserves would be down to around $4 million, which is again the target for our sewer fund, for our rating agencies . They'd like us to maintain about $4 million in the sewer fund. So that's so again, our forecast there is we need a 4% rate increase this year and then 5% rate increases each of the next four years to achieve those two objectives. Go ahead. So what does this mean in terms of rates? Again, what we're proposing for 15 is a 4% increase in both the water and sewer rates. How does that stack up? Go ahead. On the typical monthly bill. This shows are our combined water and sewer rates for a typical single family home in Long Beach. Compare how it's changed over the years. You see that what the increase there, the total increase the purple is the water and the yellow or gold is the sewer and it's against a 4% increase in total is $2.12 on the combined water and sewer bill. How does this compare to other cities throughout California and our peers in our in our area? This is the total water and sewer bill. And in this analysis, we also include the fee that our property owners in Long Beach pay to the sanitation districts through their property tax bill. So it's a true apples and apples comparison because there is an additional fee that that's paid for sewer service provided for the sanitation districts. So when you combine that, you see how we compare to what's called the L.A. County Average, a grouping of cities in Los Angeles County, how we compare to other large cities in the state . And then we also like to show Golden State Water, which is a private utility that provides water service in a very small part of northeast Long Beach. We provide their sewer service, but Golden State provides the water service. So the entire difference there for the Golden State customers is, is their increased water bill that they pay to Golden State water. And I think I'll I'll conclude with a couple of comments that are that I don't think I should be here tonight and not talk about the drought and conservation. I want to thank the members of the Council for your ongoing support of what we've been doing in the law, in the water department and for what you've been doing in the community. This is a very, very serious drought that we're engaged on. You've all heard that Long Beach is once again leading California through this drought. I'm sure you've seen that we in July, we reduced our consumption for water to the lowest level since 1958. We'll do the same again in August and we'll go for a three peat in September. So this is a very, very impressive thing that the city of Long Beach is doing. I want to thank the council. I want to thank the city departments who are working closely on this. And I certainly want to thank our constituents who are doing a wonderful job of setting a great example for the entire state of California . With regard to water conservation, we don't know how long this drought is going to go on. So the more we can save, the better we are. Thank you very much. Thank you. And thank you all for the for the presentations. What we're going to do is we're going to first, I just wanted to make a quick comment. I just wanted to thank there's a lot of you in the audience that are either here for this or public comment. And thank you for for bearing with the longevity of tonight to this point. I also want to ask the heads of each of the departments one department head can each can take the mic so that when we ask the questions, it can go go smooth. So someone from water, someone for our public works at as well as our health and human services. That way the questions can be asked and we'll have a smooth process. And we'll start with Councilmember Price. Thank you. I wanted to address the Department of Health and Human Services, and thank you really for the work that you do with the homeless program and operations that we have in the city. I was recently at a restaurant and a resident came up to me, which happens a lot more often than I ever envisioned nowadays. But a restaurant. A customer came up to me, also a resident of the third and said, you know, talks about the homeless problem and the issue that they perceived as a problem to be near the Belmont Pier area. And and said, you know, why are aren't the homeless and why doesn't cities like Newport and Corona Del Mar have the same issues with the homeless? And I explained to them that because Long Beach is not Newport or Corona Del Mar or Long Beach, and how very proud I am of our Health and Human Services Department and trying to work proactively and with the limited resources that you have to come up with constructive solutions that provide those individuals with options, choices and positive. Options that are available to them that otherwise wouldn't be without our city. So I wanted to highlight that and and say that I understand that you're working with a very limited budget when it comes to our homeless programs and the efforts that you do for that program. Can you elaborate a little bit more in terms of anything new that you plan to do in the coming year to enhance the program that we currently have? We received the unified funding agency status, which is that for the continuum of care, what that will allow us to do is to be more flexible in the way that we the way we use our resources for homeless. So as we see different priorities pop up, it will allow us some more flexibility in how we address those issues. In addition, we're working very closely, as you know, with the quality of life teams and with our met teams. Quality of life is with the police department, includes an officer and a mental health provider to do outreach. So as people are seeing homeless and they're seeing situations where we ask that you do contact us because we will send outreach workers out. And the multi-service center is being it's under construction right now. It will open again in October. At that time, we will have our partners co-located there and we will continue to do all of the different services that we've that we've done in terms of helping people find housing and address their other needs. Well, thank you for the work that you do, and we look forward to supporting you in any way that we can. Thank you. Appreciate. Council, Councilmember Gonzales. Thank you and thank you for the report. So I'll first start with Health and Human Services. Again, I have to reiterate. Thank you very much. I know we see the effects in the First District because we often see homeless individuals. And quick story, we I believe your outreach group took a family off the streets, a family of about four or five off our 14th Street area. So it was a huge deal to not see them, you know, struggling up out in the street. So that's just one example of how we see it every single day. So just in speaking with the homeless coordinator that I think you have proposed here, I know there's some reorganization within your department. Is that replacing anything or is that in addition or what what can we expect from or what is that position exactly? The new position is in addition, it's not replacing replacing any service. It will this person will help sort of coordinate, exist, coordinate new programs and existing programs. They'll be there to provide greater coordination around outreach to the chronic homeless population and to work with that to work with other grants. We see it as providing up to 2000 hours of extra outreach because they'll be sort of helping to reduce some of the other work of other people who are doing direct service. Great. Thank you. And public works are a thank you for your presentation. I just have to say thank you for all that you do because I we also see the work, you know, in our district daily. And if I can just say one thing, I know it wasn't really touched on here, but just in regards to just privatization and inner city employees. And I know that it's it's really important, you know, in my perspective, to be able to identify other cost savings, to be able to keep our street sweepers, our refuse and other city employees, you know, within within the city. And that's certainly something that, you know, I'm supportive of and just. Thank you. That's all I wanted to say. Thank you very much. And also, actually, I think we love the street sweepers. Can they sweep our alleys? I know we talked about that, but that's something that always comes up. So I hope that, you know, we can certainly address that somehow. As we discussed yesterday at your budget presentation. By request, we will have streets. I mean, street sweepers will go into the alleys. But it's not a program that we have currently. But if there is a need, will accommodate that. Great. Thank you. And then lastly, the water department. I just wanted to also say thank you as well. I know you're great work. It's very progressive initiatives. Linda Garden, we, you know, handle a lot of that in our office, keeping our rates low and also being fiscally responsible. Thank you. And and a question about cast iron pipes. I know that when do we expect to upgrade those outdated pipes or what is the process for that? We've been regularly replacing cast iron pipes, which is our oldest pipes, which are the ones that are most susceptible to breakage since the early 1990s. So over 20 years we've had a significant program. We've replaced about half of them thus far. So, you know, the remaining half will take us about another 30 to 40 years. But, you know, so again, strategically, we've replaced all the ones that we've had problems with. As we talk with your office and particularly in your district, a lot of the ones that are in your district are in the alleys. That's a very difficult situation and a lot more time consuming and and expensive. But again, at the rate we're going, it's about a 30 to 40 year period before we replace the remaining little less than half that we still have. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Mongo. Yes. I want to start by thanking the great work of our health and public health department. For those of you who don't know, I started my county career as a budget, a budget analyst for health services, L.A. County. And so the work that you do is imperative. And I appreciate how thin of a margin our matching funds are against the revenue that you draw down. That's quite a testament to both our financial management division and your department to be able to leverage those funds effectively. One of my areas of concern is that over the last 10 to 15 years, mental health funds into the region have more than doubled, in some cases almost tripled. And our city has not seen that same gain in grants. Is there any strategy that we could take in the next few years to better partner? I believe L.A. County has seen an increase from in the $700 million area, up to $1.9 million in terms of additional funding to the region. I recognize that a large portion of that is to deal with some of the issues in our correctional facilities. But there are a lot of correction facilities to community programs, as a lot of our officers will attest to, that we have many issues in pulling them out and back into society in a meaningful way. Are we working on that with our probation officers and our police officers? Is there a way to draw down that major funding? Yes. So there there are multiple different services in Long Beach to the Department of Mental Health from L.A. County, has an office here and they provide direct service. We're working very closely with them. Mental health America provides there are key partner with that with us in providing mental health services as part of our continuum of care and other services. They're also part of our integrated physical health and mental health program that we're working on in terms of working with our criminal justice partners. We are in conversation. We are we will be one of the pilots through the L.A. County Mental Health Diversion Program with Jackie Lacey. So we we have been meeting and talking about that with both the police department and with the city prosecutor's office to develop that model. And we will be working with L.A. County to look to move that forward. Our goal is, is that we can address those issues here before they end up in the L.A. County jail. Please let me know how I can be helpful. Public Works. Thank you for your expedient response to the flood of constituent requests through the GO app recently. We've received a lot of positive feedback in the effective ways that your staff have responded to our graffiti issues that have recently arisen from some releases that we've had in the area. Could you give us a quick update on the Street Payments Pavement survey? Yes. Approximately a year ago when I joined the city, as far as being the direct, not the director of public works but the city engineer, my first vision was to update our 2005 payment management plan. We have already a consultant on board that have finished their survey. We're working on the the implementation phase of it. I should have a very comprehensive plan for you within the next month or so. So after you're done with your major hearings, I'll bore you with that. And will that comprehensive plan come with a dollar amount that would be required to move our current street conditions to a. More manageable scale of accountability across the city. I will give you all that data in regards to where we are with the current index. How much money we need to spend per year to stay as status quo. And what you need to do to increase that index. Great. I look forward to it. And thank you for your partnership on a potential program that we might be bringing to the fifth District soon. Related to pilot programs will add efficiency to our street sleepers while not outsourcing that. My grandfather was a tree supervisor for the city, and I know the great pride that our community employees take in the streets that they drive down and that they live in our community and they care about our community. We recently had a few calls for service, about one medium, and there was a a street sweeper, and he didn't he got a new route and he didn't know about this particular median and which day of the week it was handled. And I thought he was very professional in his response to our constituents and they've given some great positive feedback. So thank you for making the adjustments to the route. And lastly, last week I made my first water waster app declaration, so I'm sorry to the resident who was wasting water, but you have been reported, I think that your app is wonderful. It is both creative and innovative. The kids in the community of our neighborhood association have been tasked as water enforcement officials and their parents have used their little not iPhones, but they play iTunes on it. We call it an iPod there, their Wi-Fi, iPods to report. So you will be getting many reports from the fifth District soon as we have deputized a team of young people. And I wanted to comment on the lawn to garden program has typically been only for turning a grass lawn into a garden. One of the things that's happened in our community is we've actually explored artificial turf, and that's currently an expense that's completely burdened by the homeowner. I've made that personal choice to change over, but some of our senior citizens are less likely to make that kind of change because of the restrictions and moderate income that they're depending on . And so I appreciate the discussions we've had on a pilot program to potentially experiment with a lawn to garden option and was hoping that, Kevin, you might be able to let us know it would 90 days or 120 days be a reasonable amount of time to discuss the components of that pilot program so that our senior community could reduce their water intake without any changes to the Neighborhood Association's happiness with their lawns. Oh yeah. I think 90 days is very reasonable. We can put a pilot program together and have it implemented within that time frame, I'm certain. Excellent. The senior citizens of my community. Appreciate it. Thank you. That I have no more questions. Thank you. Constable Richardson. Thank you, Mayor. I want to be I want to be quick, because I know there's a number of North Long Beach residents here waiting for the council meeting to begin. So. So let's let's start with. Well, we have water just that just chimed in. So I know with the scarcity of water and our our aging infrastructure and the increased price, you're hit with like a triple threat to your budget. So I'm happy that the the water water board and our president here's a ninth District resident Mr. Salts gave her. I'm happy the water board in the last council took steps to ensure that we will have a fiscally sound water department that will maintain services for our residents and jobs, you know, quality, quality employment here in the city. My question is really about the lawn garden program similar to Councilmember Price. So my wife and I, we just converted converted our lawn. We love it. It's low maintenance, relatively no water. But across the street from my home, the neighborhood across the street, they they don't have access to this program. And we've talked about it loosely. But I wanted to just ask out in the open, you know, there are certain areas in the town who aren't you know, who are not customers of Long Beach Water. I know that a significant portion of our lawn to garden programs funding does not even come from the city of Long Beach . What would it take to to expand a similar program to all corners of the city so that everyone can participate in this water conservation effort? Well, thank thank you for bringing that issue to our attention. We were actually unaware that you have a small section in your district that's served by the other large private water company that does business throughout this region. That's Canal Water region. That was the Domingo's Water Company. So so those constituents are eligible to apply through their water provider for the rebates that the Metropolitan Water District has. So that's $2 per square foot. So they could do that today. They wouldn't. So they wouldn't go through us. They're not our customers. And it wouldn't be appropriate for us to spend our ratepayers money since they're not contributing to our revenue stream. But they could do that today through their water providers. And same situation with Golden State in the fifth District. If we wanted to do more than that, then we'd have to have some legal analysis in terms of who would be appropriate to provide the additional funding to bring the level up to the $3.50 that we pay all of our ratepayers. Our ratepayers. Thank you, Kevin. And I don't know that the pilot would necessarily need to be the same program as what everyone gets, but even $2 is better than better than it really. We want to make sure that they're included in the outreach efforts and ensuring that they are they should they are encouraged to participate here. So what I'm really interested in is maybe a conversation at the at the commission level or maybe maybe we have a conversation about, you know, working with the city manager to work with these other agencies, Cal Water, Golden State Water, to ensure that we're taking this seriously and making it easier for our residents to do this. So that that would be my suggestion. I don't either respond to this point, but we're going to we're you know, that's something I'm interested in pursuing next. In terms of the health department, I want to begin by thanking them for the work that they do. They mentioned very clearly, Kelly mentioned very clearly that it's a science and an art to manage a department that's, you know, upwards 90% grant funds. Our office, the ninth district office, has worked with them very closely in the in recent years, and I've seen their commitment to our community. I was hoping you can provide an update on a couple of things. First, you mentioned very quickly a proposed healthy Long Beach plan that might be coming. That sounds really interesting. Could you just shed some light on that? As we started to look at all the different activities that we do across the city, across our departments, as well as a lot of the place based efforts, we all are working in a way that that applies to a healthy Long Beach. And so what we've been doing is meeting as a team of department directors. And so pretty much everybody you have heard from so far in terms of the public safety, the library, code enforcement, neighborhood services, as well as public works and workforce investment, all of us together are sitting down to say, okay, how do we, as a coordinated effort, move forward the health of this city? Because it takes all of us. There have been many plans that have been done so far within the city, including the Community Health Improvement Plan, the safe Long Beach violence prevention plan, mobility element. The land use element is underway. The housing element. We are working on a healthy living policy and there are active living principles. All of these things are already in place as well as a lot of strategic planning for many of our partners. And so we're coordinating all of that into one document and then starting to move that forward for the city. Thank you. I think that's really important to do. And along that same vein. Would you mind chiming in with a quick update on the Kaiser Permanente Heal Zone program in North Long Beach? Sure. So he goes on really is an example of how it takes all of us to move things forward. So we've been working with Public Works Department to make street improvements as a result of the walk out at findings at Grant Elementary, Starkey Elementary and Hamilton Middle School. We've been working very closely with the Parks Department around implementing a fitness zone at Coolidge Park, and we're putting in a new one also at Hilton Park. And we are in partnership with Long Beach Community Action Partnership. We have a grant elementary farmstand that's open after school every Tuesday when it's in session. And we're partnering with the Jordan High School AIMS program and working to identify and implement a project there to improve nutrition and fitness at the school, as well as working with the children's clinic to create sort of a voucher system where they can they can write a prescription and have a voucher redeemable at one of the local and at the farm stands at our healthy corner store, the farmer's market. Great. Thank you. And then finally, so I'm really interested in this chronic homeless initiative coordinator position. I remember just months ago, we pulled together a number of the agencies that that have homelessness issues in North Long Beach with their police by different agencies, Caltrans, L.A. County, flood control along the river, Southern California Edison right away. And and we we came together as all four agencies and talked about a strategy to to address these encampments from a holistic standpoint. Is this something that this position would take on and really build on? This position will be really coordinating different efforts such as that, as well as some of the other chronic chronic homeless initiatives. Yes. Great. Thank you. And then the public works. I'll be quick. A number. The questions I had were were a number of the questions I had Councilmember Mungo brought up. So I won't chime in there, but I will I will say that I am interested in seeing the valuation, the numbers that come back from this study as to how much it would cost to actually keep up with, you know, with the level of of the level our streets are or to improve on that. So I'm really interested in that. That's it. Thank you. That's all I have. Concern Boston. Well, I'll be shorter than Councilmember Richardson. But that won't be tough to do. And I know my colleagues in the audience would appreciate that. First of all, I'd like to just thank all three department heads for being here today, and thank you for the excellent work that you and your department put forth on behalf of the city of Long Beach. Each one of you have contributed in your departments, have contributed to making Long Beach a leader leading city in the state of California, particularly in the areas of health. I think we have the best public works department in the state and our water department is leading the way in conservation efforts as well. Noted. Now, my question is for Mr. Malloy, and right away something jumps out at me on the the financial summary and the budget, particularly in the 515 expenditures. It's markedly different than 514 in the areas of material, supplies and services. It's a significant reduction, I want to say close to $39 million. Can you explain that? I'm trying to find that. Is that part of our presentation or you're talking about the budget document. The document? Yes. Welcome. Can I have my document? You know what he was asking? So so under the proposed you got it. You're looking at adjusted f y 14 and propose that y 15. Correct the difference of 2 million. No, about 39 million. Oh, okay. So these are basically the one time funds that were allocated to public works to be able to perform all those projects. So it is just basically the one time funds that fluctuated from a 514. Okay. But it's it's under the line under the materials, supplies and services. So would it would it be largely weighted on services? Now he's talking about materials. I really. I thought this would be quick. So it takes a village to raise me, right? This. This is basically the difference between private services or services that we we have for all those special projects. Okay. So you have a significant or would you say you have enough in the budget to to carry out the services at the level we expect? Correct. So this year's budget, basically, it was flat for us. It's it's possible that what you're seeing and if y 15 is the movement of one of the bureaus into the city manager's office, therefore there will be a reduction in our budget. Okay. Thank you. Maybe we can get some further clarification on that at another later date. I'd like to also, while I have the director of the water department here, think your department is doing a great job. You know, we hate to see rate increases, but they were pretty much imposed upon us by the Metropolitan Water District. Is that correct? That's right. Can you explain the metropolitan water districts where rate increases and and and their reserve fund? No. I'll leave that up to our med director to do. And even I can't explain it. So so I understand that they have a pretty robust reserve, yet they rate raising rates. Absolutely. And I want everyone to know that Mr. Guardia has done a tremendous job to point out the financial irresponsibility of that. But to no avail. Okay. I just thought it was important for the public to understand that. But I wouldn't pass up this opportunity to give you some information. Please. So. So today at their board meeting, despite the fact that they revealed that instead of the $352 million in surplus reserves, surplus reserves that they last reported that they had, it was reported today that that was actually 400 between 400 million and 425 million. So another 50 to 75 million that materialized in the last two months of their last fiscal year. So despite that, they continue to raise their water rates and they kept their property tax at the same level as last year when they. The only reason they're supposed to be allowed to do that is if for purposes of financial necessity, they can't reduce their their parcel tax. So they made a decision today, which director Lowenthal did not vote for, which said that for purposes of financial necessity, they need to keep their property tax at the same level as last year instead of reduce it as they would otherwise otherwise be required to do by law. So I can't explain it. Well, thank you for the briefing. And I'm sure now that our that we're aware, our residents will pay a lot closer attention to what's going on in other public agencies that impact us. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Much shorter. We think just getting counts and branches. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. And for all you individuals who don't know the budget in all nine districts, we will have a budget summit. So this is our quick. This should be. I just want to talk to the health department and the public works. One question. The population by seniors is growing in Long Beach in our current program and services in the health department. I just want to know if they're keeping up with the increase, you know, especially for our seniors. And that's for the health department. No. Okay. That's all I need. We we we are planning, though, it is a key strategic goal for us to increase those services. And we're working closely with Parks and Rec, who also have the senior centers, but that is a key focus areas of ours moving forward. Currently, we do not have the funding. I say that being a senior citizen. Thank you very much. The other would be public works. And I would like to know. How. Does we you know, how do we support our school and their recycling efforts? Could anyone tell me that in public works? Councilman Andrews, thank you for that question. This one I can answer gratefully. We this we required a city contractor, which is Waste Management, to provide recycling collection at all Long Beach schools. And we support the green for the green teams at different Long Beach schools and we provide technical assistance to the school. So we are definitely involved and we provide those services. Thank you very much. That's it. Thank you, Councilwoman Price. I'm not queued up. It was on the Red Canterbury ring. Uncomfy. Okay. But nobody ever addressed it wrong again. But actually, Councilmember Andrews, I was going to ask the same question about senior services, because it's not here in your in your for future applications. Some programs I would love to see some programing in their next next budget round or even shorter. You know, that's you know, for me, I just became a senior citizen. So there's a point for me as I reach another era in my life in regards to and this might be a totally different, different topic that we might be getting into. But I wanted to ask about the the housing, the affordable housing that's out there for 21,000 residents. So a thousand units I know that we've been talking about the housing element and the 20% set aside for affordable housing. Does that come into play with this at all or is there is there a nexus to this? The these units, they're they're the housing authority vouchers. So they are funding directly from the from HUD that that that we support people and working with different landlords to house them. It is not part of this piece of it is not part of the the building of additional housing. Yeah. Okay. That's a city manager question and you know, where are we going with that, with that, with that project, with with our housing authority, with the 20% set aside for affordable housing in the in the overall housing element? Yes. Earlier earlier and there was a report given in the Budget Oversight Committee where as Barack gave a presentation on the 20% housing set aside dollars that are coming back to the agency, that are getting repaid, back to the FSA, to the city, excuse me, in the form of affordable dollars and going to our housing trust fund . So that was a pretty thorough report. It's available in the Budget Oversight Committee and we could certainly give you that. Okay. Yeah, I missed that meeting, so I was wondering about that. Also, in regards to the Health Department, the yeah, $1 million in general fund, which is great. I mean, that really says a lot about the health department and all the money it brings in. I think I've said it before in regards to the wonderful staff you have and being able to go after grants and bring them to the city and but what does that 1 million go to using in general or general types of services? I know some of it goes to homeless services. And those resources are primarily for homeless services. A good portion of it in. Okay. And I had one more than know when you're looking at identify sustained funding for the health department. What things are you looking at as examples. Looking at some different federal grants? There are a number of large federal grants out there right now looking at health promotion and other prevention strategies. So we have applied for a couple of purple. Of those are waiting to hear back. There are multimillion dollar grants we are working at, looking at different partnerships with our local health care systems and with other with other partners to start to build and more consistent grant funding that's not related to a specific project, a short term project, but something that is more sustainable. There might be an opportunity there for some senior services. That is one of those key areas we're looking at. Yes. All right. Wonderful. Thank you. That's it. Or by the way, I am not that I don't like water and public works. I love you guys. But I met with him earlier this week, too. I think I got a good orientation at that point. Thank you. Thank you. And finally, Councilman O'Donnell. Thank you. And I'll try to make this as efficient as possible with regard to public works. Thank you for all you do. You did a great job an of park started expanding that park about eight years ago and I just finished it off with a nice community center we opened a couple of weeks ago. Beautiful building, much loved by the community. So thank you. You did a lot of work this year on Stearns. We've got more to do now. WHALEY The same thing, more to do now. And we've got plans for the Nature Center done a little bit out there, but we'll do more. So thank you for your help on that. That's my point. You guys do wonderful work. All right? You're really on top of it. So thank you. Question about parking meters. As I recall, we were going to put 800,001 time money into parking meters. That's you right that your department, is that accurate? Correct. This is being worked with the city manager's office. I believe you had a two from four that explained where we going. There was an initial request from Belmont Shore Associates that they wanted to go to a more advanced technology as far as parking meters that utilize. ID cards. So we have done extensive studies. We have looked at financials, and our next task is to talk to the stakeholders. And when everybody is on board and understand what the issues are, we'll come back to city council. I guess I don't necessarily have a problem on the credit card. I've used those before, but the doubling of the rates, as I understand it, seems a little excessive to me even though they are competitive now. I think that's a bit of a jump and we're putting $800,000, I guess would be one time. General fund money to Belmont Shore keeps part of the funding. Correct. So would they carry part of the burden? Belmont will fund their SIPP portion. The 800,000 is for the rest of the city, which includes downtown and other areas that have parking meters. And downtown doesn't keep a portion of their money. Downtown keeps 50% of the parking, creates the rest, goes to the LBA. So they'll they too will carry some of the burden of the cost of the correct that that should happen shouldn't be all on the general fund if they're going to share some of the I mean they all they may have revenue. Balances now that would cover those expenditures. So again, they should participate in that. With regard to street sweeping, I hope we're working on finding some efficiencies there. I mean, around here, we've had the two extremes. And from my point of view, you know what, we're good at contracting out. We're good at cutting, but we're not good at finding efficiencies in innovation. And that's something we need to work on as a city. So I hope as we look at. The street sweeping bureau. RVO label it, that we can look at finding efficiencies and innovation over there that will save costs and enhance service levels. We've talked about the two hour window, etc., so I hope that that can be done and I hope that's ongoing. You know, Robin, you propose, hey, not contracting out. You know, Pat was on the path of contracting the amount that the council last council, not all of them, but put them on. And I get that. I mean, that's management, that's leadership. But we need both here and both means finding efficiencies in innovation. So I hope we can do that. I hope we can really look at that. I mean, a couple of years ago, we were going to contract out time. We never did. But did we ever find efficiencies in innovation there? I don't know. So again, let's think like that. We need to do more thinking like that. With regard to water, thank you. And are you going to meet with Parks and Rec tomorrow? As I understand it, I made some comments a couple of weeks ago that sparked some interest over on your site. I know I had a conversation with your president there. Great conversation. And hopefully we can find ways to work together on the on the water front, especially with regard to Parks and Rec, because it's so expensive for them to maintain their their fields, etc., that, you know, our kids are on every weekend. And this isn't just about water, this isn't just about grass. It's also about what we want as a community for our kids. So that's a big deal to me. And with regard to your fund balances you have down here, I noticed the water fund and there's probably one on the sewer fund too. You talk about your ending fund balance. I'm assuming beyond your ending fund balance, you have reserves for your CFP projects too. So with these be separate from your CFP project, set it set aside dollars. You know, there's no there's no additional. So there is no it is. Okay. So I guess so it's that thing. That's it. Okay, great. And one other question for our I'm going to punch back to you on page ten of the community handbook. It talks about some one time expenditures and fleet. And I thought the way we funded fleet operations typically and you could correct me was that we bill interdepartmental so that when let's say you know the police department has as a vehicle public works bills them I don't know maybe on a monthly basis $600 per vehicle. I don't know what it would be. And that would cover, you know, the maintenance and the cost of the vehicle. So my question would be, what are those one time expenditures? I believe they're $8. If off the top of my head, if I'm correct, 4 million I'm sorry, 4 million. It's a jump. And it says one time there. That's what piqued my curiosity. Council member. The fleet operation is under finance so I'll. Answer that question. The that you are exactly right as the funding this is the expenditures related to collections from the departments to buy replacement vehicles for them in FY 14. The amounts of purchases were kept low below the amount that was collected in FY 15. We are proposing that fleet replacements start to catch up with our aging vehicles and have a more normal fleet replacement schedule. So that increase of four is just to get us to our normal replacement level with money collected from the departments. Okay. So if it's. Money collected from the departments, why? Why? Or is that figure that we're seeing on that chart from the departments? Yes, it is revenue. So it's from the different departments. And then what you're seeing is the expenditure of that, an increase of four. Okay. Got it. With that, thank you. Thank you. Councilman Price, would you come back up? Sorry. Mr. GROSS right on that same point. Is it possible for us to get a list of. What specific priorities you and or department heads contemplate in regards to the Fleet Fund? We are. We are. And Councilmember O'Donnell talked about innovation and the whole area of how we replace vehicles and fund vehicles we are looking at from top to bottom. So at present, that is a a holding point for what we know will be a required replacement list. But we are engaging a consultant to help us look at and review which vehicles should be replaced to do it in the most cost effective manner so that we are not replacing vehicles where it is more cost effective to keep them in service a bit longer, and that we are replacing those specific vehicles that are costing us more money than it's worth keeping. So we are in the process of reviewing that and we can certainly that probably will take several months and we will not be spending that money, but we know that based on our study. But that management partners suggested that that $11 million, which is the total amount for FY 15, is an amount that we will need to spend. We just don't know exactly what vehicles they will be yet. Well, then, is it fair to say that we also aren't ready to spend the money until that study is complete, and that that probably won't be for another 4 to 6 months? It will be shorter than that. And we and so that money will be needed fairly early on in the FY15 cycle because we have to meet when the cars are available, the new models are available, we have to order at that time. So we'll be ready for that. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Just I just have one comment. Mr. West, also through as far as the health department. I'm really happy to see another one making a lot of changes to adjust to the changes in the Affordable Health Care Act and all the new the new reality of where we are with health care. I just want to make sure that that one we're reinforcing with all of our part time employees at the city what their options are when it comes to the Affordable Care Act. And I just mentioned it because I casually was talking to one of our part time employees who was mostly a Spanish speaking employee who didn't feel like she had the information about what her options were. And so I think the more that we can do to provide all of our our workforce, that particularly the part timers that may not be met may not be getting the medical benefits through the city, as much information about their health options. That would be that would be great. And then second to that, I think that we can do as a city hopefully a lot more moving forward as we partner and promote the Affordable Health Care Act. I think it's in our best interest to get as many Long Beach residents signed up as possible for the long term health of the entire city. And so if there's ways moving forward that the council and the city can partner to and really begin a larger campaign that's already happening through that through obviously to the federal government and that we can get our our residents signed up. I still find large amounts of people in our city that don't have all the information, particularly those that don't speak English. And so I think we need to do a better job of that, particularly in in different languages. Mayor We've worked very closely with our community partners to holding events throughout the throughout the different times. And we are certainly willing to reach out to our, you know, to our employees and and broader community as we do that. So we are part of a large a large consortium of people, and we'll continue that process. And the work you've done so far has been great. And so I don't take it as a criticism because I think I see the Health Department out there all the time. I see the table and the community worked with the nonprofits. It just I think there's opportunities for us to go beyond that. And hopefully we can we can work together on that. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. So with that, going to turn this over and open it up for public comment on the budget. Please come forward. Hi. My name is Gregory Moore. I am here to speak in favor of one of Mayor Garcia's budget recommendations, and that is a one time $50,000 in matching funds for a marketing plan for the Arts Council for Long Beach. I. I have a pretty good. Lay of the land in Long Beach artistically. I have covered it a lot as a journalist. I'm also a musician and a writer. Long Beach has a tremendously vibrant art scene. It's definitely one of our cultural strengths, but I think, as we all know, Long Beach has never really done a good job establishing itself as a destination location for outlying areas. It's something that we all want to see, and culturally it's one of the things that we can attract. We we have this great scene going. So a marketing sort of a marketing plan developed, good marketing for this would be really helpful. And one of the things I understand that would be would be used, I understand from the new executive director of Victoria Brian. Is would be. For a comprehensive arts calendar something we don't have no publication in Long Beach provides a good arts calendar, something we desperately need not only for outlying areas to be aware of what's going on, but for people within Long Beach, which is a pretty big city, to be aware of what's going on. With their own community. So I haven't got a. Good chance to know this, Brian, yet. I do know Mark Austin, Michael Sugarman, the president of the Arts Council, the city of Long Beach, couldn't have a more a better presence and a better advocate for the arts than Marco. The Arts Council recently released. A. Strategic plan where they did some self analysis. And one of the things that they themselves noted in the past is that they haven't done a great job marketing. That kind of self-awareness, I think, really bodes well for this money being spent to some new strategies to really put Long Beach more on the cultural map. Thanks very much. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good evening, Bear. Members of the council. My name is for de Castro and I'm a resident of the third district. My address is 616 Grand Avenue. And I'm speaking tonight on behalf of our housing advocates. And I had the pleasure of being at the Budget Oversight Committee that Vice Mayor Susilo Atwal facilitated. And I think tonight as well and last week, just seeing the complexity of the decisions you have in front of you, I'm really I have to say, I'm really impressed with the amount of homework each of you has done and the work that you're doing to really ask critical questions. So really appreciate that. I'm here tonight to urge you to engage us, the community, stakeholders, on the critical issue of housing that is affordable to Long Beach working families. As we heard tonight from Director Kelly Collopy that the city has provided safe and affordable housing to approximately 21,000 residents in 7000 units through housing authority. But we still, as she admitted, there's still a huge gap with regards to housing production. And as all of you know, the Council of Governments instructed the city that we need 4009 new units by, I believe, 2021. So we're still in a housing crisis. And I realize. This is a really, really long road we're on, but we have to begin that journey with one step. So I encourage you to to engage us on this issue. It's been a discouraging, to be honest, that we've been at every budget oversight committee meeting, council budget hearings, sharing testimony, written materials regarding dedicating the boomerang funds for affordable housing. Yet there has been no council dialog or response to our presence. It's also very significant to have this level of community involvement, as you can imagine, this complex time to have residents provide their testimony, either, you know, their personal stories on this issue. So there's been a lot of community engagement on it. I also want to share I facilitated back in 2005 actually for the department Health and Human Services, the ten year plan to end homelessness. And there were five key elements that we identified back then. And the first is, and I'll just mention it right here, the first finding was how the housing goal was increase the number of homes that homeless and low income people can afford. So I think Director. Colby is doing a great job of helping to meet that need. But we again, we. Need new housing production and let's let's begin that journey and let's work critically together. Thank you. Thank you. Speaker, please. Good evening, Mayor and City Council. My name is Carrie Gallagher. I'm the executive director of housing Long Beach, and my information is on file. You know, last. Week, 100 people came out to the city council meeting and stayed very late to show their. Support for the use of boomerang funds for housing. 35 people were there at the Budget Oversight Committee tonight, and even 20 people have stayed linked to the night as well tonight to show their support. And we're here especially tonight to address housing as an issue of health and as an issue of infrastructure health. It's a pretty simple connection, right? I mean, the health department does an excellent job at addressing homelessness, but. We do not prevent homelessness until we actually make sure that people have affordable homes in which to live. And as it relates to infrastructure, you know. We don't get homeless people off the streets by building more streets. We get homeless people. Off the streets by building more homes. And so I want to make it very clear, since so many people have asked, well, if we, you know, put the boomerang funds towards housing. Or a percentage of the funds, where will the money come from? And so we are proposing tonight that infrastructure is the first place. Where the money should be realigned and rebalanced to represent the full. Extent of community infrastructure with. Housing as one of those basic building blocks of community infrastructure. So for those of you who are not at the Budget. Oversight Committee tonight, like Mr. Ranga, thank you for your. Question. I will give you a quick recap. We were very grateful to see the agenda item or to see boomerang funds. Finally, agendas. But unfortunately, because of time constraints, the many speakers were only given one minute to. Speak and council made absolutely no comments before receiving and filing. The recommendation. So we recognize again, we were on time constraints, but we are here again and we will keep coming to urge you to take this behind the. Rail and please have a meaningful discussion about housing and the boomerang funds. I'd like to spend the rest of my time reacting to the staff report that was given to the Budget Oversight Committee and CC Blanc, a carbon copy to the City Council. Around the Boomerang funds. This report paints an. Inaccurate and misleading. Picture of housing resources available for housing creation in Long Beach, and it diverts the conversation from addressing the topic at hand. Now the eight page report made an extensive list of different resources available in regards to housing, but. Unfortunately it does not actually. Address the question of creating a. Permanent new local revenue source. Many of the funds. That were identified, over 9. Million were home and call home dollars, which do not create new. Housing at all. These are rehabilitation and homebuyer assistance programs. Other monies that were identified were debt obligations that are legally required to be spent, such as the 24.7 million from the mayor's proposals, and the rest are state and. Federal dollars available only to developers, not to the. City. And though these are resources, this is not addressing the actual need for funds. Lastly, the. Report was discouraging because it seemed to assess that we're doing more. Than enough for housing. And we cannot have a meaningful discussion with you around housing until we actually admit that. There is a housing crisis. And so we hope that we will move forward. This discussion tonight that you will address the issue of boomerang funds behind the rail, and we urge you to support the. Commitment of these funds for housing. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hello, counsel. My name is Ben Fisher. I'm a resident of the First District. I'm here to let you know. I personally attended multiple community meetings on the housing element, multiple planning, commission meetings, council meetings, budget meetings, budget committee meetings, and frankly, my opinion. Yet nothing has been done around funding new housing stock. Nor do I feel the community input process around housing has been sincere or impactful. This is set to be the fourth year without any new city funding for housing. Please do not be fooled by the recent report touting state bills or some of the other things I've seen touting things coming from housing, rental assistance from the federal government. This is said to be the fourth consecutive year, despite needing to produce 4000 new affordable units by 2021. We've been asking that 20% of the funds returned to the city go to housing, and many of you in your actual campaigns have said that housing is a priority issue and even specifically mentioned that 20% of boomerang funds should go to housing. The funds would not create a deficit, but it would redirect existing funds. So I have a question for all of you. Do you feel you have the power to shape a budget someone else created, which is pending your approval? If your answer is no, then what is a function of your approval? What is your role in this process? Assuming there is no political will to move the funds around. And if you guys want to have a meaningful dialog about where those funds would come from, we would love to have that conversation. I ask that you please make sure that during your tenure you do not allow a fifth year to go by without any new city funds for housing. If you feel that you do have the power to shape a budget someone else created, then please take time to evaluate where housing is in the infrastructure, safety and health priorities of your constituents. I particularly emphasize this for those of you who spoke of housing as a priority during your campaigns. If housing is a priority to you and those elected to you, it should be prioritized in any budget that you approve. Someone once asked me after the seat took on none of the community and housing element. Why is it so hard? I answered, Because it's the most important element, the biggest part of people's budgets. So if it's the biggest boat to turn around, it'd be easier to just let it be. Don't be a council that lets the big important choices continue floating on into the sunset. Roll up your sleeves and turn it toward your constituents voices. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker. Good evening, Mr. Mayor and council members. My name is Gloria Rivera, resident of the second District and a community organizer with Housing in Long Beach. We are here before you yet again today to talk about boomerang funds because it was advised by the city council during the housing element last year that we bring it to the budget and talk about it within the context of the budget. We came today during the Budget Oversight Committee hearing, and as you heard before, not only was our time cut down to one minute, but there was absolutely no discussion behind the rail about this. So what good is coming to the budget hearings if there's not going to be a healthy, vibrant, robust discussion about this housing crisis and its need? Recently, we have heard from you, Mr. Mayor, that the next big issue city leadership is going to be tackling is affordable homes. But before we talk about building new homes, we have to talk about where the local, permanent local source of funding is going to be coming from. The community continues to present themselves in support of remedying this housing crisis. Just think about what this would mean to the community and to the members, which you all serve. It would allow us to to as a city, to leverage other resources everywhere to help foster safer and healthier community and neighborhoods. More importantly, it would demonstrate your commitment to the well-being of your community and your city. It will set a higher standard of leadership for the region, and it will establish trust through your support of the community's needs. On the other hand, imagine what happens if we don't allow boomerang funds or locate any kind of local source of funding. Are you willing to be the one to say to a homeless vets, Sorry, you can't find an affordable place to live or to a single mother? Sorry, you have to decide between paying rent or your medical child's expenses. You know. Sorry. I understand that this is a hard decision to make. I understand that this is politically challenging. I understand that these funds have supposedly been allocated within the budget. But when you do what I do and you hear these stories day in and day out, you know what? It's not that hard of a decision because you see firsthand how this will affect thousands of lives in Long Beach. We recognize the resources that the staff has discussed in the memo, but they are not new. They are not local and they are not permanent. And if not boomerang funds, then what funding are we allocating? And if not in this budget, then when we have heard over and over again that now is not the time, how far down the road are you willing to kick this can? This is an issue of health, of public safety and an overall benefit to the community. So if the question is where do we pull the funds as it has been, then pull it from infrastructure because it's a benefit to the overall community. The time is now to show your leadership and to show your commitment of service to the people of Long Beach. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Just to make sure I'm unless there's another speaker who's going to line up, I'm cutting off the speaker's list. If you haven't, unless you want that, please line up, sir. Okay. So that gentleman will be the last person on the speaker's list, please. Honorable Mayor Councilmembers. Dave Sterling. With the IAM and as many of. You already have expressed. Tonight, I'd like to express our support on behalf of the roughly 3500 employees within the city that we represent for the mayor's budget recommendation of stopping the pursuit of outsourcing, street sweeping, but rather searching in word inside the operation to find efficiencies and cost savings or at the same time maintaining the high standard of service that exists currently. The idea of city management partnering with our members, the city employees who perform the work. On a day to day basis makes sense, and it should serve as a model for other operations as well rather than than outsourcing. Look at ways to make current operations better, more cost effective. The employees who perform these services, many of them live here in the city, and they. Take ownership and pride in the work they. Do. And that's something you won't find by excising an operation and outsourcing it. And if the charge truly was to find cost savings and efficiencies, it's my hope. Management partners would have found this solution long ago, as we already could have been saving the amount of money that we hope it will. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Hello. Good evening. My name? Gigi Fusco. Ms.. I am a proud member of the Arts Council for Long Beach Board of Directors, and I'm here to speak about the one time allocation that's in the budget proposed for for our organization. It's a great group, the Arts Council of Long Beach. We are very committed to the arts, the artists and all the art performing arts, visual art groups here in our amazing community. They bring they bring up the raise the quality of life for all of us. They feed our souls, and they're also big employers in town as well. If approved for this money, it will help in our strategic plan and mission to make Long Beach a number one artistic destination, arts destination in the state of California. And I think it's real easy to do. We are so lucky. I love Long Beach. You don't have to leave the city limits to find anything you want. We have the Long Beach. We have a symphony, opera, ballet, the Long Beach Playhouse, Musical Theater West, the Found Art Exchange, the Expo Building. We have so many wonderful organizations which time will not allow me to list them all here tonight. So don't get mad at me, guys. We have so many wonderful things. What a lucky group of elected officials you are that you have these treasures in your town, in your own districts. We went out and talked to them and we found that they really need our support. They have weathered the financial downturn. They are still here. A lot of organizations, museums, performing arts groups, they have not weathered the storm as well. And they need our support. We need to see them thrive and grow. We need to see them bringing in new people into town and also providing all the wonderful educational programs that they have. We need to let people know that they exist and they need to be supported. I know this firsthand. I ran the Long Beach Playhouse for many years and worked with musical Theater West and it's really great to see the faces of people who come to Long Beach for the first time to see an exhibit or a show. And that is not just something that's fun and to to feed our soul, but it drives the economic engine of our community. When you go out for dinner, for a show and dinner or to go see an exhibit, you're employing a babysitter or a parking attendant, you know, waitstaff, restaurateurs and maybe a bartender or two. That being said, this money will help us really shine a light on the arts in this amazing community, drive tourism and let our residents know about all the wonderful assets that they have. They don't have to leave the city limit at all. Long Beach is the best place for arts. We need everybody now. Thank you. Thank you so much. Next speaker, please. Oh, hello. I'm Joe Weinstein. Eighth District of the Community Budget Book encourages citizens to come out and say, what are the services that matter to them? And so that encourages the kind of special pleading you have heard tonight. And we'll hear more of I'm not here for that. I'm not here to endorse or oppose a specific recommendation for this budget. I would like to point out that those of us who would like to take a broad picture rather than advocate for one program and expand one program, and if the money somehow won't have to come from somewhere else, I'm here to advocate for those of us who are ready to make trade offs. If only we had the information to suggest those tradeoffs four years ago and more. The budget, as posted in its papers, provided a certain basic amount of information to allow you to cast out specific services and therefore compare their costs and therefore decide maybe you would like more of this and less of that. The one signal example that I have seen tonight and I commend I commend that example is the Water Department's presentation, which showed us the difference in costs between MWD and WMD or WMD. At any rate, that enables you. To make a comparison, enables you to make policies that don't call for increasing funds, but says, Gee, we ought to shift things a little bit if we only can. Well, we don't have such guidance in the budget ever since four years ago, even recommendations that I made based on cost comparisons and another occasion of ordinary trash collection versus straight sweeping, they were based on cost that I could assemble only from the budget of four years ago and more. Because you have given because the budget's given the citizens no real tools to suggest rational alternatives, and they apparently give yourselves behind the rail. No more such tools either. I find it very difficult to participate any further in this kind of so-called budget process. So I suggest that if you really are serious about crafting a budget, give yourself more time between the first public unveiling and the time you've got to pass a budget. And second of all, make sure that that budget document once again breaks out unit costs for specific services. Thank you. Thank you, Joe. Joe, you will be happy next year where we're looking at some new budget software and the end also is restructuring the process a bit to make it much more open and interactive. And there's some great stuff happening out there with some open government budget software and some of the process, participatory government stuff that's happening , budget stuff that's happening in some of the districts. And that's all going to come together next year in a new way. So I think you'll you'll be back here, I hope, saying that you look forward to it. Okay, great. Please. Hi. My name is Kathleen Irvine. I am the president of Whitmore City Heritage Association. And first of all, I want to thank the mayor and the council members, because I have no idea how with a part time job, you are able to take care of this budget oversight and take care of your districts. So thank you very much for everything that you guys do. I really, really appreciate it. I came here basically to thank the mayor for his recommendation to put in a preservation planner into the budget. I understand that it's not supposed to cost any more money, but I want to emphasize how important it is to our districts. We have 17 historic districts. It is not just about paint, color or fence heights. Historic districts are wonderful because they speak to the character of our city, the craftsmanship of the people who lived here. It is a sustainable solution. New buildings are always less sustainable than repairing old buildings. So I just want to thank the mayor for his suggestion. And please all of you support this suggestion for a preservation planner. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hi. My name is Jim Darrow. I'm also with Willmar City Heritage. How do I follow that? That's exactly what I'm here to say. Thank you for suggesting the preservation planner. It helps with the integrity of the or the historical historical integrity of our neighborhoods. Really quick, also, I want to thank public works. I wish all departments in the city were run as well as you guys. You guys have always been there for every call we've had regarding everything from new parks, helping us with planners and such as well as street sweeping. So thank you very, very much. You outstanding. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker. Please. Hi. My name is Jenny Searson. I, too, live in Wilmore City. I just wanted to thank you, Mayor Garcia, for coming through on your campaign promise of supporting preservation in our historic districts. And I love the Long Beach. Next speaker, please. Good evening. My name is Michelle Dobson. I'm a third district resident, grew up in the seventh District and my business is in the fourth. So I am here tonight to speak on behalf of the Arts Council and the Arts Council Board of Directors and the Board of Directors members and and the staff. I am in my final third year term, final three year term, so that's nine years total on the Arts Council. During my first three year term on the Arts Council, our meetings were at the ungodly hour of 730 in. The morning at Bixby knows, but we had 45 people at those meetings, including a staff member from each of the council districts, a member from the mayor's office, a staff member from Economic Development, a representative from the cannabis office, and a representative from the police department. Those meetings were full. Everyone was a participant and everyone had a buy in to the Arts Council. What we were trying to do. I'm not an artist. I'm not a photographer, a singer, a writer, a director, a Delson, an actor, a professor of art. I do none of those things. Nonetheless, our board has that level of diversity where we have arts professionals alongside accountants, college professors, lawyers and marketing professionals, each with a full buy into the new strategic plan. So I urge you to adopt the recommendation for funding to implement that strategic plan. When I was interviewed as an Arts Council board member for the Strategic Plan, I reiterated why I have served three three year terms as an Arts Council Board of Directors member. I expressed to the Strategic Planning Committee that it continues to be a priority for the Arts Council, that we increase our engagement, our presence at arts events , and providing marketing support for arts organizations in all districts in the city. Full engagement from west of the Los Angeles River. The Los Angeles River, which we call the flood control. If you grew up here to north the area around Jordan to Long Beach Poly, which we call the east side, when I was growing up because I didn't know there was anything further east in Pali and to the true east of Long Beach over by Eldorado Park. It turns out that other Arts Council board of directors, members and stakeholders had the same ideas about what they desired for the Arts Council. That we become engaged in all nine Council districts and we make everyone aware of the events that are going on within walking distance of their homes. We recently partnered with and co-sponsored a joint skateboarding BMX art event where we featured skateboarding and BMX artists. We had a second event where we set up a mobile gallery at the Long Beach Formula Drift Racing event and featured Long Beach, Long Beach artists. We also partnered with Stuart Ashman at Miller, Chris Stokes at the University Art Museum and Michele Roberts at the Carpenter Center. So they would show each of these artists works and would also give free entry to their families so their families could come and see what they were doing. The implementation of the Arts Council Strategic Plan will bring us right back to where we were, where we're asking you to partner with us, assign a staff member to come to our meetings and be a part of each one of our meetings and help us implement the strategic plan. Thank you so much. Next speaker, please. Hello, everyone. My name is Aaron James Lawrence LeMay. I'm new to Long Beach. I've been here about six months now for those months out of the six, I've been on hiatus, so I really haven't been involved when it comes to making money for my living in Long Beach, but I have spent from my living here, I live at the sovereign across the street and I notice actually called the previous mayor when I saw the advertisement for the up and coming mayors. It should be noted with the assistant that was there, I called and I said Hi, I'm curious about running for mayor and the assistant transfer me to the person taking care of the current mayor and then said he's already endorsed him. I said, Were there any other positions available in the city? It's a true story. I was at the Newport Beach AT&T store, where I was account consultant for a year and a half with businesses in and around Irvine and Newport Beach. Before that, for about 15 years I was an entertainer and I took myself. To I just want to make sure this is budget. This is this is budget related. This is well, I reviewed my budget. I came in tonight because your door was open and I literally just got off the train from going to Universal Studios today where I was visiting lots of friends. So budgets are everywhere. The reason why I felt compelled to speak to this budget matter and to all of these issues, I'm deciding whether or not to stay in Long Beach for my own personal housing. If that issue didn't come up tonight, I wouldn't. It came up a lot. So I came to throw my personal voice instead of everyone else with budgets and studies and paperwork's in there pledging everything. I'm just giving you a personal perspective, saying that I'm deciding whether to move myself to North Hollywood or other places that I can be involved in arts. Because I studied I lived in Japan for a year and a half. So I know a lot about technological homes and living and working in Japan. There is technology where I could take a card and it's still there. At the Shinkansen station I would get off and I'd go to my home and I'd put a card in and the electricity would turn off. When I would take that card out to leave, the only way I could get in is by tapping it, getting in, putting that in the slot, and then the electricity would come up . So I know that you guys are going to do everything that you're going to do to study to make sure that Long Beach does the best it can do. I just wanted to throw my name in the hat and say, I hope that the decision. That everyone makes to make the city better entertainment wise and bringing in consistent revenue for everybody. I hope it keeps me here. You know, I'll be around. My name's they. Call me A.J.. Thank you, A.J.. Hope you stay in Long Beach. Okay. Thank you. That was. Thank you for the attorney for the the budget hearing. With that, I need to take a motion to table the discussion to the next budget hearing. Second. There is a motion and a second on the floor. All those in favor say to table it. Okay. Budget hearing tabled. And from there we're going to move on to consent calendar. Kate in a second I was in favor say, okay, we're going to turn that over now to the item that Mr. Mayor.

AS AMENDED a bill for an ordinance amending Chapter 27 of the Denver Revised Municipal Code concerning housing, establishing permanent funds to support city affordable housing programs, adopting an affordable housing linkage fee applicable to new construction to be effective October 1, 2017, and dedicating a portion of the city’s existing property tax revenue capacity to the funding of affordable housing programs beginning with 2017 property taxes to be collected in 2018. Approves creating a permanent fund for affordable housing programs, adopting an affordable housing linkage fee, and dedicating a portion of the city’s existing property tax revenue capacity to funding affordable housing programs. This bill was approved for filing by Councilmember Herndon. Amended 9-12-16 to change the composition of the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee. The change would remove one of the mayor’s appointments to the advisory committee from an “at large” appointment to a requirement that the appointment be a non-profit affordable housing developer; thus, resulting in two slots on the committee

DenverCityCouncil_09192016_16-0626

Nine eyes, four nays. Counsel 25 as amended passes now councilmembers we are putting Councilman Espinosa, please put Council Bill 626, as amended, to be placed upon finer consideration and do pass. Mr. President. Thank you, Mr. President. I move the Council Bill 6 to 6, be as amended, be placed on final consideration and do passed. It has been moved in second to it. Members of council. I'm going to let Councilman Herndon go in, but please don't feel the need to you know, I think you spoke on both wheels. But Councilman Herndon. This president to weigh this conversation even further would seem disrespectful to those waiting for the next courtesy one hour public hearing. So I forego. Councilman Herndon, thank you. Um, it's been first and second. Any other comments? Madam Secretary, roll call. Herndon, I. Cashman they can each name. Lopez. They knew Ortega. Sussman Merry Black. I. Clark. Clark stepped out. I stepped out. ESPINOSA Hi, Flynn. Gilmore. No, Mr. President. No. Please close vote in the results. Sorry. One moment. Four Eyes, eight nails. Four eyes, eight knees. Council Bill 626, as amended, has failed. Councilman Espinosa, please put Council Bill 760 on the floor.

Recommendation to adopt Specifications No. ITB TS-14-034 and authorize City Manager to execute a contract, and any additional amendments thereto, with Paradigm System Solutions, of Tempe, AZ (WBE and SBE), for the purchase of Toughpad mobile computers and related components, in a total amount not to exceed $1,157,552. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_02042014_14-0096

Motion carries five votes. Next item is a recommendation to execute a contract with Paradine systems for the purchase of touchpad touchpad mobile computers not to exceed $1.157 Million. Okay. There's been a motion second and a second. Councilmember DeLong. Thank you. Staff, could you give us a quick overview of what this technology will be? Curtis Tunney, Vice Mayor, members of the City Council. Councilmember DeLong This is actually to acquire 342 Panasonic tough tablet computers using U.S. Homeland Security grant funds. The computers will be installed in police, fire and harbor vehicles. Police will receive 200, approximately 260 of the tough tablets fire 71 and the harbor department ten. The the currently the these vehicles have some Panasonic tough TOUGHBOOK computers which are eight years old or so and so they're in definite need of replacement. So this does this upgrade for. Just replace all. All. Of these computers now. Nearly all of the computers that are in that field today. Great. Thank you very much. Thank you. See no other public comment or counsel? Please take your vote. I'm a yes. Motion carry six votes. Yes. Next item. We're done and we're done. Actually, there's no more. And we think we're going to go ahead and move on to your business council member, Andrews. Yes, thank you. Vice Mayor and I will be hosting my Free Six District food distribution on Friday.

Recommendation to receive and file a report from the City Auditor on the findings and recommendations of the recently completed audit on the City's Business Improvement District oversight.

LongBeachCC_01162018_18-0043

Excellent. Thank you. Very nice and thank you, of course, everyone that staying late for these items. We appreciate that. We're moving on to item ten, please. Communication from Councilman Austin, Councilwoman Price Councilmember Super Non recommendation to receive and file a report from the City Auditor on the findings and recommendations of the recently completed audit on the city's business improvement district oversight. Came into preference over. Councilman Alston. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I'd like for first of all, a staff report on this. I know our economic development department was involved in this as well, but Mr. City Manager is there staff. Report I'm assuming we're going to have that reported in our section. We weren't expecting the staff report. I'm sure we can ask John some questions, but I think we're just expecting a report from the auditor. Okay. Well, that's great, too. And I'll turn it over to to Laura Doubt, our auditor, we brought this item forward requesting a audit of our bids several months ago and our city ordered it, took it our our department took it upon themselves to to move forward with the the audit. I think the findings were very interesting. We got it in a24 from that which is commonly mentioned. I don't know if everybody understands at home with a24 from is but it is a memo or a report back and we got a great report from the city auditor and I thought it merited attention before the floor because it was an excellent job. I think it did. The the findings will will certainly help us improve the efficiency and accountability to all stakeholders in our bids and inspire public confidence. I think the report I'll just say was, was, was excellent and overall the outcomes were pretty good and there were some great recommendations. And so with that, I'd like to turn it over to you, Madam Auditor. Thank you, Councilman Austin. And thank you. For to Councilwoman Pryce and Councilman to Vernon for your support in. This item. Mayors and mayor, members of the City Council. I have been observing you tonight for over 6 hours. And I want to say that it's really impressive. It's I think it shows a lot of your devotion to public service. I've noticed that none of the issues have been rushed tonight and that you've asked very good questions and been extremely focused on the issues to serve the public. And it's been impressive to me. And a night that I'll remember. Is a clicker. I just have a couple of slides. If I can just start out with a couple thank you's and I would like to specifically thank the bids and the executive directors of each one of the bids. I'd like to thank Craig Kurkjian for being here this evening and for his work with the downtown big welcome for the Bixby North Degrassi for Thelma Shaw, Steve Goodman for CVB, Kristine Hammon for East Anaheim's of area. Christopher for Fourth Street, Annie Greenfeld for Magnolia Mono with for Midtown and Tosha Hunter for Uptown. All of the bids were extremely cooperative and open during the whole entire process. I also want to thank City Management and John Keisler, the director of Economic Development, and Eric Romero for their cooperation throughout this whole process. They have been nothing but cooperative. And. Open to our audit and our suggestions, and this really could not have gone any smoother than it did. So I want to. Thank them for that. As I mentioned earlier, one of the reasons why we chose to do this bid is because we had not looked at the bids over the past 12 years. We know in 2016 that the bids brought in approximately $17 million to be invested in the city's business corridors. And we know 9 million of it was passed through to the city. And we know that the bids play a very important role in the economic vitality of our city and do tremendous work for our city. So and also, the city has a stake in the business. You know, the city's of property owner within for the property based bids. And they all about $630,000 in assessments in 2016. And it's important to the city council because you approve the formation of the bids, the agreements established, the assessment formulas and the the annual activities that they report, as well as their budgets. So I believe this is an important item to the city council so that, you know, that, that you're approving a plan that is consistent with what you're expecting from them. And we wanted to make sure that the city was supporting them in the best possible manner so that they can continue to work and have a positive impact on our on our community. And we know that they are doing great work. This has been a great experience for me and learning more about the the investment of time and resources the bids put into our city, the improvements for crime and security and cleaning efforts for their innovation, and putting events together like the taste of downtown and the car shows and the holiday parades and just as strong savers and security efforts, social media advertising. It's been a great partnership, we believe, between the city and the bids. And we wanted to make sure that the city was providing the best possible services that they could. So I just had a brief three slide PowerPoint this evening and just wanted to touch on a couple of things. Our audited focus on the city's management and oversight of the bids, including how the city handles the agreements and the reporting. We did find that there is room for improvement in the city's oversight. We had five key findings and some multiple recommendations for this. Just wanted to say that regarding state law, that that rules the bids. They're required to submit annual reports to the City Council, proposing activities and budgets for the upcoming year. And after reviewing annual report submitted for fiscal year 2017, we found that many of the reports were missing several components and did not provide a full picture of the bid operations. There were some estimated amounts of surplus in carryovers from the previous fiscal year and the amount of contributions received from sources other than the assessment levies. We believe that a budget to actual comparison would help identify these missing items such as these, and we recommend that in order to be compliant with state law and simplify the reporting, we recommend that the city reassess which reports the bids need to submit. We also recommend that they create templates and institute a review of all required reports. Part of our objective was looking at the city's management and transfer of the fees. The first was related to tracking and transfer of payments. The city receives assessment fees from business, property owners and the county, and ultimately the city passes this on to the revenue to the. These functions are incredibly important so the city can ensure the bears receive the revenue they're entitled to and that it occurs on a consistent schedule so that the Bears can receive the revenue when it's expected. We're talking about $9 million a year in assessment fees which are passed through to the city. So this is a significant amount of money we want to make sure we're tracking properly. And our recommendation was to address these issues centered around the simplifying of payment processes and have the city create a schedule to track the payments . Regarding assessment formula, this is number three on the slide. We found that the city was not facilitating, but that the city was not facilitating communication and assessment fee formulas, which led to some mistakes and how some of the businesses were billed and the assessment fees were not charged to all businesses due to errors in the system used to track the data and how processes were designed. So our recommendation was to have the city communicate more effectively on assessment fees with all involved parties, and to partner with the bids to identify unlicensed businesses in their districts. Our final slide here is when a bid forms the city, contracts with a nonprofit and creates an agreement outlining responsibilities for each party through interviews with the bids. We learned that the bids were either not aware that agreements existed or are not knowledgeable knowledgeable of the terms in their agreements. We also learned that the city is currently not enforcing all agreements as required, and after reviewing the agreements, we also found that agreement terms are outdated, ambiguous and cumbersome. So we found that there are too many reports they take too long to produce and they're often repetitive. We recommend that the city update the bid agreements to reflect current processes surrounding required reporting and payments, and the city should discuss the new agreements with the bids to ensure they are knowledgeable of the terms and enforce the new agreement terms. And finally, our communication of information. During the audit, we learned that each bid operates unique to the needs of their district. But there are certain topics that are universal to bid operations and oversight. The city's role is to be a liaison for the bids by collecting and passing on assessment revenue and facilitating the required and reporting. We found that with these responsibilities, the city has limited staff to perform all of these duties. And so the city we recommend use additional communication tools to help provide bids with the necessary information. The more effective the communication process we know, the more efficient the bids can be. And our recommendation is for a communication framework to be established in the form of a handbook and targeted trainings. In conclusion, overall, I'm very pleased that the city and the bid's agreed with our recommendations. They were open there, they were receptive. They came up with other ideas on how this whole process could be more streamlined. And the relationship between the city and the bids is a partnership that is working well here in the city to the right regarding the economic vitality of it. And we hope that the recommendations in our audit report provide a blueprint and guideline and framework for the bid program moving forward. So we thank you for your support. Excellent work. Thank you very much. Comes from us and we thank. You again for that great. Report and the excellent work by your your team of auditors. And I'm glad that our bids were supportive. Most of the feedback that I have received has been positive, especially from the out of town bid, which I understand was found a little bonus in there. So that through the process, can you. Explain that? Yes. There was an actual underpayment to the uptown of approximately $54,000 from the city to uptown. So they did receive a bonus of about $54,000, which was approximately 30% of their budget. So that was a big bonus as a result of the audit. So I know Councilmember Richardson. Is very supportive of that audit now. And to that point, I also want to. Just acknowledge that we do have some staff here. You made several recommendations in your your audit. And I want to give our staff an opportunity to just talk about how they are addressing some of those recommendations. Great. Mayor Councilman Hughes, before I give this over to John and Eric, I do want to point out that we've got you know, John is brand new handling the bids, so we've got brand new management of the bid's working with the auditor. And also Eric Romero is brand new as well. So I'm very, very confident with two fresh eyes here with the department head director and also Eric being brand new as well, will take a fresh look at the bids and be pay a lot of attention to to the audit and work with COBA to facilitate all this. So, John, any comments? Yeah. Honorable Mayor and members of the City Council, Eric Romero is our our. Bid coordinator and he'll provide a short. Update as to how we will respond to the audit recommendations. Thank you. Good evening, honorable man. Members of the city council. I'll try to keep this short. The Economic Development Department is in support of the auditors findings and is committed to implementing the recommendations included in the mid order report. We feel that this will help to create the appropriate program structure and transparency that is needed to better support our business improvement districts. And we would like to thank the Auditor's Office for putting together a great audit and the Business Improvement District staff for their cooperation. The Economic Development Department plans to implement all of the auditor's recommendations in either fiscal year 2018 or calendar year 2018, depending on the specific recommendation. We will primarily focus on three different areas of work, which are payments, policies and procedures and professional development. In regards to payments, we will focus on establishing the appropriate policy. Seasoned procedures to ensure that bin payments are made on time, that they are accurate, and that all staff involved across departments understands the appropriate process moving forward. We're already moving forward with this recommendation by developing a property based Improvement District Payment Process Handbook in the Economic Development Department. It will define these policies and procedures for collecting and making payments to the bids. It will centralize key information required to make payments such as the assessments, amounts due per department and other government agencies such as Language Transit and Language Unified School District, that are also responsible for an assessment. It will centralize all of the index codes that are required to make payments. All of the contact information for key city personnel across departments that is involved in the PE bid payment process and payment tracking schedule for the bids as well. In regards to policies and procedures, we are moving forward with developing a bid handbook that will cover topics such as the roles and responsibilities of the city and the nonprofit organizations that we enter into agreement with. We will also include the agreements with the city in reporting requirements, payment and fee processes, PE bids, district management plans, and the annual reports of PBIS assessment formulas and the history on each bid. It essentially be a central clearinghouse of information that will help business improvement district leaders run successful business improvement district. We will also update each bids agreement with the city to reflect current processes and enforce and also enforce these agreements as much as we can will create templates for annual reports and other required reports as well. And in regards to professional development, will train bid staff on key legal requirements and city requirements that they are required to follow. We will also provide additional trainings with new executive directors or bid staff come on board and we will help bids, access and better understand data that they need to help run a successful bid such as business licensing information and property owner information. Our immediate next steps are to start scheduling meetings with individual business improvement districts to discuss in detail the implementation goals of the city. And it is not our intention to implement any of these recommendations in a vacuum. We will work closely with all of the bids to ensure we are all in alignment. This is just the beginning and we think this is going to be great to get the bids to where they need to be. We look to continue to support the bids and to ensure that we can continue to grow them in the city as well as are doing great work. And again, thank you, auditor down. Thank you. Thank you. And next, we have Councilor Rachael Brown. Thank you. Honorary Daoud, we really appreciate all your efforts here. You had mentioned that the process was embraced by the members. I know in the case of one of the bids in my district, they were really looking for structure and it appears that that you were able to provide that and not only just structure for that bid that will be consistent throughout the city. So thank you for that. Yes, thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Mongo. I always love how you consolidate all the big thoughts into just a few slides that really drive home the points. Often those that are managing our beds are running corporations, little mini corporations. And to be able to distill it down in the way that you did. Every single person I've talked to has said. How helpful and supportive the entire process was. And so it only reinforces how we have the best auditor anywhere. Thank you. Thank you. But you really want to be on the city council? Yeah, please. I thought it was obviously a joke. Councilman Price Pryce. Good thing for me, the nomination period is over because she lives in my district and I do not want to be auditor. So I just wanted to say thank you to you and to your office for the great work that you did on this. It was a huge undertaking and clearly something that we hadn't really evaluated ever. And so I appreciate you doing that. And I appreciate Councilman Austin for having the foresight to to realize that there were some efficiencies that could be had and some consistent application of policies that the city and and the bids will benefit from. So I want just want to thank you. That was an excellent presentation. And I know that the bid that I work most closely with the Belmont Shore Business Association is aware of the report, and I think they're actually getting some money that is owed to them, is what I read in the report from the city. So anyway, thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. Utter doubt. Is there any public comment on this item? Mr. Mayor, members of the City Council, I'd be remiss if I didn't congratulate our out for the excellent work that she conducted on this audit. Following a spirited conversation year ago December here in these chambers relative to this subject matter. Auditor Dowd and I had a conversation. And what she said was, if she decides to do it, if she decides to do an audit on bids, it will be done in a strategic manner. It won't there won't be a witch hunt involved, and there'll be clear objectives involved in that process. And she kept her promise. All the bids collaborated. All the bids contributed to the process. You're reading the report that the artist's office presented. I want to feel as though the bids had a role in writing that report based on their contributions, based on the information, the contributions that they made to the report. There are some cities that go out of their way to help bids succeed because it is an economic tool that they can use to their benefit. There are some cities that don't do anything at all to help these bids. New York City is one of those. Prime examples that has 75 bids. Within their cities, within their city, and they go out of their way to help the bids become successful full time staff, full time manual, full time execution. And I think that's a model that we could look at as a successful model for bids to succeed and for cities to be able to work with these improvement district. So again, thank you very much for your patience. Thank you very much for your leadership. And thank Auditor Dowd for. The work that her team conducted on behalf of the business and the city. So we're looking forward to. Working with us on this in a very. Strategic manner. Thank you. Thank you. There's a motion and a second. Please cast your votes. Thanks. Yes. Motion carries. Great. Thank you. Item number eight and nine or both of the Parklets will take photos up.

1) Proposed CB15-0892 amending sections 48-61 through 48-90 and 32-116 of Chapters 48 and 32 of the Denver Revised Municipal Code to require a license to operate Solid Waste and Recycling hauling activities in Denver: a) Presentation. b) Fifteen (15) minutes of public comment on proposed CB15-0892. Two minutes per speaker and equal opportunity for opposing perspectives as determined by the Committee Chair. Individuals wishing to speak must sign up in the Council Conference room (3rd Floor City & County Building, Rm. 391) beginning 30 minutes prior to the Committee’s scheduled start time of 10:30 am. Sign up ends 15 minutes before the meeting begins at 10:15 am. The order of speakers will be determined by the Committee Chair. c) Action on CB15-0892.

DenverCityCouncil_11302015_15-0892

Ahead. Thank you. It's six. I'm sorry. Eight. Nine two is a new policy that the city and county of Denver is proposing for haulers of waste. As everyone knows, one of my favorite topics talking about trash, composting, recycling. And so the interesting thing is we spend a lot of time talking about it, but usually we're only talking about half the city. We're talking about single family homes and multi-unit properties of less than six or less units. And so what that means is when we're having all these great conversations about how to have a more sustainable city, we're literally only talking about half the city because we have a situation where companies and multifamily properties have seven units or more are covered by their own trash haulers who don't work for the city, don't report to the city, and we don't have any ability to really track what it is they're throwing away, what they're recycling, what they're composting. So I'm very excited about this ordinance because what it's going to do is it's going to create a very low threshold for licensing so that we will then know who is hauling in our city and what they're hauling. I will be very honest that I'm ready to do more than just know. I would also like to require them to be recycling and composting, but we don't have a lot of data yet, so I'm happy to wait and get that data and then move us continuing along the line of a more sustainable city . Just to compare. In committee, I don't vote on this committee, so partially that's why I'm making my comment from the floor. But we heard about many cities that already license their haulers, but many of those cities additionally require them to offer recycling at competitive rates and also, you know, including provisions for how that's done. And so there are ways to kind of improve our sustainability, not just in the residential areas, but in the commercial areas. Making sure that trucks follow emissions is really important for our neighborhoods that have a lot of commercial businesses. If you have trucks that aren't properly registered with the state and have bad emissions, that's not good for the air quality of those communities. So we'll be able to make sure that they're properly registered with the state through this process as well. So I want to thank the Public Works Department for all the work they did, putting this proposal together and really think it's an important step forward for our city. So just wanted to take a moment to acknowledge it. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilwoman. All right. That was on the bill's call now. So we are ready for the block votes. All of the bills for introduction are ordered published. Councilman Lopez, you please put the resolutions on the floor for adoption in the block. Thank you, Mr. President. I move that council resolutions 879. 80. 888. 832. 863. It's 71. It's 72 x 73. 936. You miss the eight. Oh, sorry. One more. Eight, seven, six. Yeah. Got more. All right.

Recommendation to approve naming the North Branch Library, the "Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library," in honor of her contributions to youth, education, literacy, and the United States.

LongBeachCC_12222015_15-1340

Communication from Councilmember Richardson, Vice Mayor Lowenthal, Councilwoman Price, Councilman and Con Councilman Austin recommendation to consider naming the new North Branch Library, the Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library, and refer this item to the Housing and Neighborhood Committee for consideration. Thank you. With that, I'm to turn this over to Councilmember Rex Richardson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'm honored to make this presentation tonight of this historic proposal. Before I begin, I want to thank our fellow co-sponsors for their support, Vice Mayor Lowenthal, Councilwoman Price and Councilman Austin. I believe and predict that north long beaches best days are ahead of it. I also believe that the best way to predict the future is to create it. The youth of our community represents the future of our community, and I believe we should do everything we can to inspire and empower the next generation. That means making sure the investments we make into the physical environment of our community, not just add to the esthetics and property value of a neighborhood, but also connect with and inspire the next generation. Councilman Richardson, sorry about this. I have to make this announcement because it's due to another item. And I don't want those folks having to be here if they don't have to be. Item 16 has been an item 16 has been withdrawn. So those who are wondering about that item. It's actually coming back at a later time. But I just wanted to make sure some of the folks knew that. And so back to the councilmember. Thanks. Sorry about that. So the youth of our community represents the future of our community. And I believe that we should do everything we can to inspire, empower the next generation. And that means making sure the investments we make into the physical environment of our community, not just add to the esthetics and property value of a neighborhood, but also connect with us and inspire that next generation. I believe libraries should inspire the next generation. Our new state of the Art North Library is an opportunity to inspire, and I believe that we can and should utilize this library as a means to inspire young people to retire and to go further. So before I get into the details of my proposal, I think it's appropriate to help walk through walk the public through how we got here. Over the past few months, I've had the opportunity to engage with students from Jordan High School about the new library. A concept has come from those initial conversations that I believe is absolutely amazing. The concept is to name the new North, the new North Neighborhood Library in honor of First Lady of the United States, Michelle Obama. After the initial concept from one group of students, we shared this idea with staff from Hamilton Middle School and students from Hamilton Hamilton Middle School, as well as youth from Andy. Andy Street Community Association. The Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library sparked that same enthusiasm and excitement among those young people. Then we took the next step of sharing this idea with every neighborhood association president in District nine to get their input and feedback. And of the ten presidents we spoke with, all ten not only supported the idea, but publicly added their names to the list of co-sponsors. We've tried over the past few years to work closely with our school district leaders, so we took the additional step of sharing this concept with school board member Megan Kerr, who also enthusiastically supported this idea. And finally, knowing that this library has taken many years to come to fruition, we took the additional step of reaching out to the last two generations of District nine member council members about the idea, and former council member Steve Neal added his support to the idea. So given the broad level of support in the community, it's made sense to take the next step of evaluating what the First Lady stands for and how that aligns with the North Long Beach neighborhood. First Lady Michelle Obama is a mother, wife, lawyer, writer, an amazing first lady. She has become a role model for women and an advocate on poverty, awareness, education, veterans issues and healthy living a product of public schools. Michelle Robinson studies sociology and African-American studies at Princeton University. After graduating from Harvard Law in 1988, she joined the Chicago law firm Sidney in Austin, where she later, later met Barack Obama, who would become president of United States. After a few years, Ms.. Obama decided her true calling was working with people to serve their communities and their neighbors. She served as an Assistant Commissioner of Planning and Development in Chicago City Hall before becoming the founding executive director of the Chicago Chapter of Public Allies and AmeriCorps program that prepares you for public service. In 1996, Ms.. Obama joined the University of Chicago with a vision of bringing campus and community together. As Associate Dean of Student Services, she developed the university's first community service program, and under her leadership as vice president of community and external affairs, volunteerism skyrocketed. Ms.. Obama continues her efforts to support and inspire young people during her time as first lady. She has four main initiatives as First Lady that very closely aligned with the North Long Beach community. The first is joining forces. In 2011, Mrs. Obama and Dr. Jill Biden came together to launch Joining Forces, a nationwide initiative calling all Americans to rally around service members, veterans and their families in support them through wellness, education and employment opportunities. Joining Forces works hand in hand with the public and private sector to ensure that servicemembers, veterans and their families have the tools they need to succeed throughout their lives. And as you may know, North Long Beach has been hosting our Veterans Day Parade and vet fest for many years. The play parade runs along Atlantic Avenue in the and next year, the march, we will march right in front of our new, new library. Her focus is her focus on the needs of. Veterans very nicely aligned with our community. The second is let's move in 2010. Ms.. Obama launched Let's Move, bringing together community leaders, educators, medical professionals, parents and others in a nationwide effort to solve the epidemic of childhood obesity within a generation. In alignment with this initiative, the City of Long Beach is proud to be a Let's Move city as we passed the resolution for this initiative in October of 2010. Also in alignment for the past four years, North Long Beach Community has been deemed a healthy eating, active living healing zone through support through the through support that the Health Department received from Kaiser Permanente and the Coalition for Healthy North Long Beach. The work of the heals on the Coalition has made strides in creating a healthier environment for all ninth District residents. The First Lady's third initiative that closely aligns to our new library is the Reach Higher Initiative in 2014. Ms.. Obama reached launched the Retire Initiative, an effort to inspire young people across the nation to take charge of their future by completing their education past high school, whether at a at a professional training program, a community college or a university. It aims to ensure all students understand what they need to do to complete their education by encouraging academic planning, summer learning opportunities in school and afterschool. Extracurricular enrichment. The same type of enrichment that will be provided by our North Neighborhood Library. The fourth and final initiative is called Let Girls Learn. In 2015, the Let Girls Learn initiative was launched, and it's a U.S. government wide initiative to help girls around the world to stay in school and stay involved. This this global initiative is also well, well aligned with the purpose of our library. So I like to play take a moment to play a video that highlights the first lady's work on education and her commitment to helping our young people succeed. There is nothing more important to this nation's future than investing in our young people. And education is at the top of the priority list. Now we know that as adults, we know that as administrators. Now we have to put our efforts where our knowledge is, and we have to make sure that young people understand that reality as well. I'm going to get there. I am working hard every day. I'm the future and I am determined. It may be hard. At times, but I have goals. And dreams. And work to do. I'm going to get there. I believe in me. I believe in me. And I'm on my way. I'm on my way. I believe in me. We are the class of 2020. And the class. Of 2020. I am the class of 2020. I am the class of 2020. We are the. Class of 2020. The president's North Star goal is that by the year 2020, we want to make the United States the leader in college graduation. Rates around the world. We're trying our best to become the future. Of America or even. The future of the world. It will completely erase the stigma that our generation is lazy and is afraid of work. I just want a better life. I want to better myself and basically be the best I can be. I want young people to understand that the challenges and trials and tribulations they face are not weaknesses, but they are things that. Can make them stronger and. More competent and more able to deal with the challenges of getting an education. Going forward. No one is born smart. You become smart through hard work. If I'm a doctor and you don't call me Dr. Harvey, you know exactly how much, how hard I worked and what I've achieved. And I'm just like this. One little person. In this big world, and I have to be different. And how do you want a career or a job? When you get older, you have to put 100% into your life now before you turn into an adult. We want our young people to be prepared for the jobs of the future. And as I've said, if most of those jobs in the year 2020 are going to require an education beyond high school, then we have to inform students of that and do whatever it takes to prepare them so that they can grow up and raise families of their own and be successful and pursue their dreams. And that's what I want to spend my time doing for these next several years and beyond. And that's why the North Star goal is important. We don't have a. Choice but to achieve this goal. It's a tough one, but nothing good comes. Easy, so we don't have a choice. We have to reach that North Star. Thank you. I know that there were some technical issues, but I think you guys get the gist of it. So. Now, I think it's important that we consider the context for this proposal. First, consider that we're in a period of time where the largest retailer in the world, Amazon, has no inventory. Uber, the world's largest taxi company, has no vehicles. Facebook, the world's most popular media owner, creates no content. And Airbnb, the world's largest accommodation provider, owns no real estate. Is it smart to say that the traditional role of libraries will change as well? This also means reevaluating the purpose of institutions like libraries simply from depositories, from books to hubs for community community resources with a much broader focus from community and life skills learning to career development and job search. So but by changing the way we think about libraries, we should also think about the way we intentionally connect our environment to the next generation. And I believe we can do a better job of ensuring our communities can connect with and identify with our local facilities and infrastructure and landmarks. Here is a list of 19 public institutions in North Long Beach. Zip Code 90805 listed our seven parks, 11 schools and one neighborhood library. When you break down how these North Long Beach institutions are named, only 11% of them are named after women. Two are 19. Only 11% of them are named after people of color. Two out of 19. And of those institutions named after individuals, 63 are named after 63% are named after national figures. All of these figures have tremendous stories and legacies. Can you honestly say that our city has done the best job we think we can of making sure our youth are connected with and inspired by the facilities we dedicate? Now let's compare this to some of our demographics here in the north Long Beach area. According to the latest data of the American Community Survey, approximately 30% of our population are youth. 27,924. And by both population count and percentage, we are the largest and youngest zip code within this city. And our youth are extremely diverse. Most diverse. Most notably, 90% of our youth age under 18. And under our youth of color. What does that mean for our future when 93% of our youth can only connect or identify with eight with 11% of the facilities in their community? This past weekend, I went and watched Star Wars and I noticed on the Star Wars movie how they intentionally diversify the lead roles in their cast. Women lead an African-American first mate and a Latino pilot. And if Disney can get it, I think we should get. Should we be surprised if we don't see the kind of community ownership we'd like to see and have is if we don't see the kind of community ownership we'd like to see out of our young people. And if we have issues with vandalism and graffiti. There's a study that came out in 2005 called Creating Culturally Responsive Schools that studies that states cultural. Cultural disconnect often leads to poor self-concept, discipline, problems in poor academic outcomes for ethnic minorities. While the library is not a school, I think the sentiment it expresses remains true for youth in North Long Beach. So we're in a moment in time in North Long Beach called the Uptown Renaissance. This is a period where our residents are more engaged than ever while we're making significant investments in our infrastructure parks, schools, public institutions. But we missed the mark. If we don't inspire the next generation and create a new sense of pride in our community. Sometimes this means thinking differently, considering new approaches, and having the courage to stand up to the forces who resist change. According to the 2010 census, 70% of 90805 residents have moved to nine out of five since the year 2000. This means that North Long Beach today is a community of newer citizens, younger families who have helped to not only continue the up the uptown renaissance, but to re-energize it. So next steps, the next step of our if our proposal passes this evening, will be to have the Department of Parks, Recreation, Marine and our Library Services Department conduct further outreach around this concept with our park and library patrons. Secondly, the Council Council's Housing and Neighborhoods Committee will discuss and consider the proposal. And finally, I've committed to our Long Beach Library Foundation that my office will host a community forum in in January to further discuss the proposal. This will be very well publicized and open. Now I have a few a few clarifying questions for staff. Number one, I've heard issues about this proposal being precedent setting in terms of naming a building for a living person. Has the city done this before? And are we outside of the scope of our authority. Mr. Mayor, members of the council? Councilmember Richardson. We actually do have policies in place through an administrative regulation that is advisory to the Council for naming facilities, and we've done facility naming as many times before. There are actually some provisions in our air that talk to, you know, this type of process. And actually, just recently, the council went through a process, the same process to name the Internet, you know, center theater against I'm sorry, for former Mayor Beverly O'Neal. So we have been through this process before. And along that same lines, I'm going to ask Mr. City attorney, what is the spirit of our current naming policy? And are we within the spirit of the regulation of the regulation? Councilman Richardson, members of the city council, I guess if I had to summarize the spirit of it, is that the buildings and facilities, public buildings and facilities owned and operated by the city that we are attempting to name after a living person, should be named after someone who has made a significant contribution either to the nation, the city of Long Beach or the state of California. And I think you've just gone through and articulated why Michelle Obama would fit in one or more of those categories. So that is the underlying spirit. Thank you. And back to Mr. Assistant City Manager. How would you compare? In terms of process, I've heard questions about process. How would you compare the process that we've outlined and the process we're beginning tonight to other recent other processes in recent history of Long Beach. So the typical process as outlined in the air is for an idea to come to the city council. The city council then refers that to the Housing and Neighborhoods Committee, what is now today called the Housing Neighborhoods Committee. And then it comes back to the council. As I understand the motion before us, what is being proposed is an additional public outreach process on top of the standard process that the city uses, as I understand it, to include additional outreach that library and parks would do. And in addition to the efforts that Councilmember Richardson is currently working on, and then bring that to housing and neighborhoods, and then again back to the city council for a decision. So traditionally, the first point of a process is what? There are a couple of ways that it can start. It either can come from the community to the as a filing with the city clerk to the city council's attention. Typically, it does come with a motion or agenda item from a city council member to agenda, or is it at the city council level and then referred to Housing and Neighborhoods Committee for further review before it comes back to the Council. So would you consider that this process was premature in any way compared to any naming process in recent history that you recall? No, this is following the same process and actually adds additional steps. So this has additional steps than what we followed in recent history in the past? That's correct. Just wanted to clarify, typically, does the city does the city of Long Beach or city staff engage in this type of outreach before the city council submits a proposal to engage? Not in recent memory. Perhaps in the past some of these have been staff driven. In recent memory, I can't recall any that were generated by the city staff. It normally comes from the city council and then goes through the process as outlined before. Thank you. So. So that's it. This proposal is historic, but not precedent setting in nature. We've gone above and beyond the outreach process that we've established in the past, and the process is well within our scope of the law. And that said, I move the motion as written as for my colleagues for support and may the force be with you. Okay. Thank you. There's there is a motion and a second on the floor. And so we have some council comments and then I may open up to the public. So Councilmember Austin, who made the second thank you. I'll be very short and brief. I think my colleague really did a great job. I want to congratulate our council member, Richardson. It may the force be with you all as well. I think he did a good job of making the point. This is a I think I've known Councilmember Richardson for many years. We've had many conversations about the future of our city, the future of North Long Beach. And I know before he got elected and when he first got elected, he talked about doing things big. And this is big. This is a big step for Long Beach is a big step for our shared community. And this is will be something that is bigger than both Councilmember Richardson and any of the councilmen council people up here, because naming this library will be something that stays with this community for many, many years to come in perpetuity. And so this is a big, bold decision that I support wholeheartedly, and I don't think there's anything else to be said there. Thank you very much. Thank you, Councilman Gonzales. Yes, thank you. So I have, of course, my own comments to make. And then Councilwoman Woman Price, she's out for surgery, but she asked me to say her comments as well. So I just want to thank as well Councilman Richardson for and our council colleagues for bringing this forward. I myself used to live in North Long Beach. So when I talk to my mom about all the things that are going on, she's really amazed at how beautiful North Long Beach is turning out with, of course, medians and new storefronts. But now something like this, that the fact that we're able to call potentially a beautiful library after Michelle Obama is wonderful. She is a woman with integrity and advocate for local youth literacy and veterans. She's our first lady. And I certainly believe why she would qualify for this. I don't know if we need further explanation or to continue talking about why she needs to be selected for this. And I wholeheartedly believe that. I remember when the vice mayor, Robert Garcia, at the time wanted to name Promenade Park after Harvey Milk. And I know that there was a lot of pushback for that. And now we finally have a park, the only one in in the nation that's named after Harvey Milk. And now potentially we can have the only place named after Michelle Obama, which is even more wonderful. So I believe in this name and fully support this idea. I asked my colleagues to do the same and and certainly support not only us here on the council, but also everyone here tonight, especially North Long Beach. And and for looking at and thinking of North Long Beach in a broader scope, which is always very important. So thank you. And then I'll move on to Councilwoman Price's comments. So she says, I regret that I am not here this evening to share my thoughts with my colleagues directly. I had foot surgery yesterday, and despite every intention to be here tonight, the recovery process seems to be more involved than I had forecasted. I want to thank Councilman Richardson for opening the discussion on this item. I know that the opening of the North Library is a very exciting development and a huge step in the effort to empower Uptown. Over the past week, I have received many emails and calls from my constituents, some of whom are very involved in some way in supporting our libraries. I have also talked with Councilman Richardson about his vision for this process based on the agenda item as worded, the possibility of naming the library after the first lady is something that is only in the preliminary phase. The process will involve discussion at the commission level and with stakeholders such as users, the Library Foundation and residents of Long Beach. I understand and respect Councilman Richardson's reasons for wanting to name the library after the First Lady. I do believe, however, that there is, since such a decision, would be a departure from our naming policy. This item should serve to initiate a longer, more transparent process, which will involve involved most certainly more public outreach. That is her comments. And thank you. Appreciate it. Thank you. Next up, I have Vice Mayor Lowenthal. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I wanted to thank Councilman Richardson for bringing this item forward. I know that. When many of us joined the city and the city government, we were all tutored in the way things were done and the way things had to be done. And I champion any one of us, especially Councilman Richardson tonight, who takes a step forward to recognize somebody while they are still in the thrust and throes of doing the work that they do. And so I do believe in honor. I do believe in honoring tradition and protocol. But I think there are times where it's completely appropriate to step aside and say that an individual in our nation or in our community is worthy of being recognized. And what better way to do it in a time when that individual is still working to advance the causes that they are working on? And our first lady takes a stand on issues that I think really is meaningful for all of us educating girls. A lot of us have focused on the disparities of opportunities in developing nations, but we have those same disparities here. And for a high profile celebrity brilliant figure, to take on that cause is something that's very much about Long Beach. And I'm personally honored that we are a city that does things first when others don't want to take the chance or risk doing that. And this is worth doing. And I thank you for that, and I thank you for coming forward with that. Thank you. And Councilmember Ringo. Thank you, Mayor. When I had my voice in support of this motion, I think that Councilmember Richardson has done a phenomenal job and presented it to us, does his research, and I am especially encouraged by the transparency of the whole thing that he's going to be having some public input on. This is going to be kicking around to the community. Certainly there's nothing to be hidden in regards to the intent of the of the naming of the library, I think is very inspirational. And it would be a great opportunity for our children to go to the library to learn more about our first lady, our first African-American first lady, to learn more about diversity and embracing diversity. I think that's the most important message that this stimulus library does is precisely that. And the force is with us. Thank. Thank you. I'm going to I'm going to go ahead and go public comment and we're going to come back I'm going to make some comments as well once this comes back to the council. So we turn this over to public comment. Please line up and just make sure you say your name for the record and please begin. To make sure that the kids. Good evening. Mr. Mayor and city council members. My name is Tanya Thresh into a Long Beach resident. And in the north and in the north, Long Beach Library Service area. I'm here to speak in strong support of naming the new library in honor of First Lady Michelle Obama. I'm proud to stand here today with a room full of colleagues and esteemed friends who are raising signs saying yes to Michelle Obama. Mrs. Obama is a proud mother, wife, accomplished lawyer and public servant. First Lady Obama has been a champion for veterans families, healthy food exercise programs, and an advocate for improving children's literacy through the Read Across America campaign. Naming the new library will send a strong message to all of our daughters and future generations of children in North Long Beach. They, too, can go to Princeton. They, too, can have a Harvard Law School degree. Reading and education are the pathway to that unlimited opportunity in our country. By naming the new law library after First Lady Michelle Obama. We will not only help to increase the public space here in North Long Beach, but this new state of the art facility will inspire our community to be more civically engaged, utilizing this new safe space for community forums, Girl Scout meeting, sharing new ideas and interacting with one another. I believe that this is a powerful, positive and wonderful concept. I find it a bit troubling that there's some opposition to even bringing up this proposal. I know the Press Telegram editorial board does not speak for me. Why can't we have a public conversation about renaming our local facilities? You know, there's an Eleanor Roosevelt High School in North Carolina, even though she was born and spent most of her life in New York City. Laura Bush has a library named after her in Austin, Texas, even though she's from Midland, Texas. Naming public naming our facilities. Public facilities for living public figures has become incredibly common, as we've heard over the last 25 years. This proposal is about moving Long Beach forward to be a more representative of our city of today and not just yesterday, as was stated. Today, more than 80% of long beaches youth are students of color. Why would we not like to have a role model like Michelle Obama named for one of our local libraries? Tonight, I would ask you to move forward with starting this process. I believe that this is the right thing to do and it sends a positive message not only to my daughter, but to others, young people across North Long Beach. I look forward to your affirmative vote tonight. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Who's going to go first? Good evening, City Councilor. Mayor My name is Current Bash and I am a fourth grader at Longfellow Elementary School and proud and a proud member of Girl Scout Troop 5193. I came out tonight to say yes to naming the new North Long Beach Library after the first lady, Michelle Obama. I am nine years old and I love to read. I am currently reading Key to the Treasure by Peggy Park. Michelle is that Michelle Obama is the only first lady I have ever known. I will love to finish reading Keys to Treasure in a library named after her. To me, she is a beautiful, smart and fun and I hope to be boss like her when I grow up. Please vote tonight to tonight to name my local library after Michelle Obama. As you make your decision, may the force be with you. Thank you. And I would like to ask to put up your pink signs if you are supporting. Dear Councilman Rex Richardson. My name is Corrina Williams and I am a student at Hamilton Middle School in North Long Beach, California. I support naming our new library, the Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library. One reason the library should be named after Mrs. Obama is because she inspires me every day. When I was in fourth grade, a boy made fun of me because I am half black. Sometimes when I got in my head, I would show him how it feels when someone talks to you like that. However, I told myself not to let it bother me and I would to think of Michelle Obama. She's black and successful. When I grow up, I will be like her. This is why I feel it is appropriate to name the library after Michelle Obama. She inspires us minorities here in Long Beach. My second reason is that she donated $250,000 to local library so kids can read, learn from the books, get good grades and go to college. She even says one of her rap songs. So you had with knowledge. She shows that through reading books. You can learn a lot and get good grades to go to college. Here are some reasons why some people think the library shouldn't be named after her. One reason is because people might think she is selfish because she wants a library named after yourself. Another reason is that she is not a Long Beach native. People who do not like Michelle Obama might graffiti the library and say things. Overall, she is a great role model, believes in higher education and motivates us to read. In conclusion, I think Michelle Obama should have the new library named after herself because she is a very inspiring Obama. I hope that this shows you that the library should be named after Michelle Obama. Sincerely, Corrina Williams. Dear Councilman Rex Richardson. My name is Bilal Siddique and I am a student at Hamilton Middle School. I am in in North Long Beach, California. I am supporting our new library now. Michelle Marie Oberman Neighborhood Library. Michelle Obama once said, If we want to go to college, fill your head with knowledge. This shows that she inspires people to go to college. The library should be named after Michelle Obama because she donated $250,000 to local libraries and she cares about education. Also, she is not a shy person. She made a rap song and went on The Ellen Show. Michelle Obama wrote in her rap, A dream is just a dream is just a dream until you go hard. In other words, this means that a dream is just a dream until you get an education. Michelle Obama is energetic. She can relate to us young people because she made a dance challenge to encourage encourage people to exercise. And another reason is because she is a role model. She encourages youth to take responsibility. Some people would say we shouldn't in the library after Michelle Obama because she is not a Long Beach hero. It would throw off the tradition for naming things after Long Beach Heroes. She didn't live in Long Beach, but she lived in South Side, Chicago. She can relate to us because because these are both low income cities. To conclude, we should name the library after Michelle Obama because she'd be. She cares about the impact of education on youth. Also, with only 80% of Long Beach High School students graduating on time, this library can make it at least 90% of students graduating on time. It will help them with resources and studying. So these characteristics show why we should name the library after Michelle Obama. Sincerely Bloom City. Thank you so much. Next speaker, please. Shirley Brassard, senior consultant, Swarm Group and Associates. I intended not to be in town tonight. However, when I read through the Gazette that this meeting was coming and this motion was being forwarded, I thought, okay, this might be the reason why I'm still here. And initially I had a question which I will state after my statement. If Mr. Richardson had recommended his mother. Receive the name of the North Long Beach Library. Many people would wonder why. They might consider honorable, but they would wonder why. Some would probably laugh if he would name his the library or propose a motion to name the library after his wife. Some, again, would think it was honorable and somebody might look at him sideways. But in bringing forth this motion. That this library would be named in honor of our nation's first African-American first lady, Michelle Obama. Nobody has to wonder why. Across the globe. No one will have to wonder why. Even those who might find reason to disagree. They can't wonder why. Before the end of time. And this goes to whether or not we buy into the creationist theory or the evolutionist theory. But according to my studies before the end of time, God has to reconcile some things in the Earth. As we're forwarding our celebration of Christmas, those of us who celebrate that as being the birth of Christ, whether or not that December 25th is arguable, as we move forward to December 25th, we're going to have to at some point reconcile his birth, Jesus birth, his death and his resurrection. Some a fast forward for a minute into next year. This time next year, next year, we'll be celebrating Passover. Right before Jesus got ready to be hung on the cross that he was carrying. A black man was pulled out from the side. From North Africa. They just found their black man on the road and made him carry Jesus's cross. That same Jesus whose birth we will be, some of us celebrating a couple of days from now. History had to see a black man in the White House. We had to see it. That we would name that library after her is but a small token. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Greetings to the mayor and the council members. I am Clarissa Spencer and I serve as the President of the Lumbee Alumnae chapter of Delta Sigma Theta Sorority Inc., a 102 year old public service sorority with over 250,000 college educated women from all over the world. Our chapter here in Long Beach was chartered in 1986. We are here today to support Councilman Richardson's recommendation to name the new North Branch Library, the Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library. First Lady Michelle Obama stated, I believe that education is the single most important civil rights issue that we face today, because in the end, if we really want to solve issues like mass incarceration, poverty, racial profiling, voting rights and the kinds of challenges that shocked so many of us over the past year, then we simply cannot afford to lose out on the potential of even one young person. We cannot allow even one more young person to fall through the cracks. As First Lady Michelle Obama, through her national initiatives, has shown that education is the gateway to success. Specifically, the Reach Higher Initiative, which inspires every student in America to take charge of their future by completing their education past high school. The initiative seeks to make sure our students understand what they need to complete their education, access to learning opportunities. A library can offer that having exposure to college and career opportunities. A library can definitely do that. And supporting families, schools, counselors and kids so kids have a safe space to learn and study. A library can definitely offer that too. In closing, the idea of the Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library was initiated by the youth from the Long Beach Jordan rap program. Our kids have spoken and we should listen. They are our future leaders and I want their voices to be heard. And I stand with them and for them in their support. Let us give our children a library in their community named after someone who they can positively, positively identify with and who 100% believes in literacy and education for all in the 21st century. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Honorable mayor, distinguished. Merry Christmas. My name is Dave San Jose. I was born here in Long Beach in 1940. I guess I must love this city because I'm still here. I want to give you a little bit of history about North Long Beach, which we always known as the orphans of the city . I'm going to cut my stories a little bit short because I only had a few minutes one day. One of the students at Jordan High School went over after school and baseball practice. He was quite a baseball player. Went over to a phone booth. A lot of you here don't even know what a phone booth is. He was called his girlfriend. All of a sudden, a drive by happened. He was shot and killed. Our community came together and said, What we need is a youth center. Let's start helping our kids. And so our big focus is and has been all about our kids. We were fortunate enough to start a program there. We had the Future Generation Youth Center, about the only youth center in the last ten years in Long Beach. And that was brought together because it was the right thing to do. And the community came and did that with all of our councilmen. Another thing that happened was all of a sudden we had redevelopment. Redevelopment came in and I think it was Jerry Schulz had mentioned that we could have a fire or a police station. And I never believed that we could do that. We got together, the community got together, and we fought it. And everything about it was a giant fight. Anyway, here we have one of the nicest police stations in North Long Beach. It belongs to us so we can be proud of. All of a sudden it came up that we can have a library. I mean, a fire station. And I think Bell was the councilman then. And we never believed that we can have that either. All of a sudden, the community got together and we only had a three little three bedroom house for a fire station. And here he had these great big ideas that the community finally came up with the ideas of having this great big fire station. Now we have one of the best fire stations in the city because we believe it. And the community came together. What this is really about. Then we had redevelopment and redevelopment came in and said, we can change our city, we can have new buildings, we can have all of these things. Well, we don't have those things. Mainly what we have is a bunch of white fences. But one idea came up and it was the library and everybody with redevelopment. There were hundreds of people from this started 16, 17 years ago. That's when the idea first came about. And it was possible we could have a library. Not for us. I'm 75 years old. It's for the kids. We really need this up here in North Long Beach. And so we worked on it. We worked on it. And the only money that we did set aside was the money for the library. So we do have a library. And that's the reason that I think the library should be named after its parents who gave it birth 17 years ago, the community. And we did that for our kids because we care about our kids. I guess my time is up. Yeah, just got to wrap it up, so I got to give everyone the same amount of time. Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Thank you. Good evening, Mayor Garcia. City council members. My name is Kate Huizar, and I'm the interim executive director for the Long Beach Public Library Foundation. I also my father and I both lived in North Long Beach for many years. I would like to first thank Councilman Richardson for getting the community so engaged and excited about naming the new North Library. The foundation feels strongly that residents of North Long Beach and residents of Long Beach should feel that they have an input in the library's name and their development. After all, it is their library. Therefore, the foundation strongly supports the idea of hosting a community forum in which names can be suggested and discussed. And I know Council and Richardson, you've agreed, you know, that this is an extra step you should take. We the foundation also looks forward is looking forward to a new main library and many other exciting civic projects throughout the city. It is important, as we have today, to be transparent about the process of naming, define and communicate the standards of criteria for such processes and include the Long Beach Committee and important decisions such as naming and others. There are many notable community leaders and literary icons deserving of this honor, and we look forward to learning the name of this, the name that the Long Beach community chooses for this library and those other institutions. Whatever the name, the foundation is committed to supporting North the North Library by raising the much needed funds that will enhance it, creating a space that will best serve the community and be something that the community can truly be proud of. We look forward to working more closely with Councilman Richardson's office, among others, on our North fundraising campaign, engaging community members and business owners in his district and beyond. As an independent nonprofit, the Long Beach Community, Long Beach Public Library Foundation, excuse me, has provided over $20 million in support of our public library system in the past 18 years. We have been actively involved in the North Library discussions and I personally look forward to meeting with all of the City Council members to further discuss the Foundation's plans to support the new North, the new main and other libraries in our city. Thank you and happy holidays. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon, Council members. Mayor. Thank you so much for this opportunity. My name is Dr. Sabrina Sanders and I'm an educator, university administrator, community leader and a homeowner in the city of Long Beach, ninth District. As a passionate educator, there's nothing more important than presenting the role models that inspire our children. Someone that exemplifies the values, the philosophies, and walk the walk of what we hope to instill in our young people. Michelle Obama is that role model. So many of our young people finally, finally are relating to our first lady, whether it's in her background of grassroots organizing and going door to door in neighborhoods exactly like ours, advocating for those that are not always represented at the table, standing strong and addressing the issues of health and wellness are speaking on behalf of the value of education for our country. She understands our communities and stresses the values for progress for our neighborhoods. She has impacted our community in ways that have never been touched by a national leader. Only because we can relate and connect to the First Lady, Michelle Obama, in so many ways. We have been so excited for so very long about the transition of North Lawn Beach, going back many, many councilmembers and many mayors ago. It's a new day in North Long Beach. Naming the library after a renaissance woman. A person who our community identifies with a national leader. First Lady Michelle Obama. A model of the leadership and altruism that we aspire for our youth and will exemplify in our vision for our community. Have a great evening. Thank you, Dr. Sanders. Next speaker, please. Get there noon. My name is Bill Sanchez. It's great to see so many friendly faces again. I'm encouraging you to share, as some of you already know, for your new ship, Long Beach and occurring, you will be U.S. high school senior. I thank here today and support Councilman Rex Richardson's decision in May in naming the new library after Michelle Obama. We have named most of our public libraries and schools after presidents or famous authors. First Lady Michelle Obama is a lawyer and a writer. Along with being the first. Along with being the wife of the 44th and current president of United States. Made her the first African-American first lady of the United States. Naming the library would be a symbol of gender equality. By demonstrating to us that we as citizens of Long Beach are making the change. Here is a quote by First Lady Michelle Obama. No country can ever truly flourish if it stifles the potential of its women and their private so of the contributions of half of its citizens by supporting a female role model. And those messages and that's where I ended her quote by supporting female role models such as herself and becoming a role model. A role model for women and men. For advocating probably awareness, higher education and healthy living. So why not name this new library after Ms.. Show Obama. After a great role model that supports the point of a public library raising higher education. Thank you. And may the force be with you. I'm loving all the Star Wars tonight. I won't have to. I'm going to work that into my comments after, I think, next speaker. Good evening. Honorable Mayor Garcia. And councilman. I am Benjamin Miranda representing Jordan High School. The Jordan Rap Program, and I'm currently the president of the Omega Brothers program. I'm here to give support to the councilman, Rex Richardson, on behalf of naming the library, the Michelle Obama library, the same way he supports not only the ZAE Sisters and. Omega Brothers program, but Jordan High School. And the North Lambie's community as a whole. One example is last year Councilman Rex Richardson gave us the opportunity to be part of the first youth participatory budgeting meeting. Actually not meeting. I'm committee sorry, where we had so much fun, met so many new people and at the end we ended up winning first and second place with the marquee and first place and the solar lights for this forest in second place. Thanks to the Councilman Rex Register and we also have had the chance to develop a closer relationship with the Long Beach Unified School District member Megan Kurt. Councilman Rex Richardson is always in full support of the youth in pushing us to do better by coming by Jordan. Coming to Jordan High School and inviting us to community events. Thank you for listening to the youth of Long Beach and considering our idea of naming the new library. Michelle Obama Library. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next speaker. Good evening, honorable mayor garcia and Long Beach City Council members. My name is Angel Pozo and I'm here representing Jordan High School and the Jordan Rep program as the Omega Brothers vice president. I would like to give a great thank you first to Councilmember Rex Richardson, because if it wasn't for him, I would not have the opportunity to be here today. Speaking on behalf of Naomi, the new library, the Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library, says you don't normally get the chance to have a voice or say in what's going on in our city or in our community. But thanks to Councilmember Rex Richardson, we have had the opportunity to have a voice in many city events and other occasions. For example, last year as a freshman in high school, I had the opportunity to host one of his events called Community Conversations to discuss the Whole Village initiative. The reason I would like to name the library, the reason why I would like the library to be named after the First Lady, Michelle Obama is because just as Councilmember Richardson engages the youth, First Lady Michelle Obama has also launched many initiatives in order to inspire youth both in health and education. For example, in 2014, she launched the Reach Hire Initiative, which is an effort to inspire youth, youth and other people across America to take charge of their future by completing their education past high school. I am proud there is someone as high up in her studies who cares about the youth. I feel strongly that we are the future. Thank you for your time and I hope that our ideas and opinions can be taken into consideration. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hello. Good evening. Honorable Mayor Garcia and Long Beach City Council members. My name is Melissa Rodriguez and I'm here representing Jordan High School and the Jordan Rap Program. As vice president of the VI Sisters. Program. I would like to thank Councilman Richardson, who has led us his high school. Students have a voice and opinion in our community. I've been in this program since my freshman year and currently I'm currently a senior now. Throughout all my high school years. Sorry. This is the first time that we as students in Jordan High School have a voice in our community. He continually puts keep. He continually puts us in the front. And we aren't treated as kids. We are actually treated as young adults who have actually have a voice. Councilman Richardson allowed us to voice their opinion on naming the library the Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library. A main reason on why US students, especially as US ladies and the Jordan Rapp ZAE Sisters program, will like to be naming this library after the First Lady is because she is a great inspiration and is seen as a role model to us women. An example given on how our First Lady inspires us youth is how she launched the US Government Worldwide Initiative. Not to let let girls learn to help girls around the world to go to school and stay in school. It helps educate and empower young women. She's sharing stories and struggles of these young women to help inspire and have their own education. This relating to our program on behalf on how we as a diverse group of young females who focus on helping one another, empowering each other as women, we focus on reaching a higher education, even though all of us go through our daily struggles. Michelle Obama, to us, in our eyes, a true leader and an inspiration. Thank you for listening to us youth and in voicing their opinion. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Next speaker, please. Should we keep it going here? Good evening, Honorable Major Garcia and lovely City Council members. My name is Cathy Servants and I am representing Jordan High School along with the Red Program as assistant president. We are thankful for having the opportunity to work with Rex Richardson and Amy, the new library after Michelle Obama. We have gathered over 200 signatures from students at our school in favor of naming the new neighborhood library, the Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library. We feel that she is a great role model and inspiration to us and others. She has inspired us and has showed us how much she cares about children and youth by all the things she does. For example, the Let's Move campaign, a campaign where children receive healthier food to live a healthier lifestyle. She has also created a Web video where she motivates women to stay in school and go to college. It feels good to know that there is people out there who cares about us and wants us to do better and accomplish our goals. We will also like to thank Rex Richardson for taking in consideration our ideas and for also always supporting our program. I really hope you take in consideration our ideas and thanks for having us here tonight. Thank you. Next speaker, please. And I don't think you. Good afternoon, Honorable Mayor Council members. My name is Megan Kerr. I am a resident of the eighth District and a lifelong Long Beach resident. I also have the privilege of serving on the Board of Education for Long Beach Unified School District, and to tell you, I couldn't be more proud of our students . But I've also been in this game long enough to know that following students is absolutely the worst. Place to. Be. You have a copy of my support letter in front of you, and I just want to reiterate a few of the things that were said. This is absolutely the next great step in having this conversation move to the wider community. Councilmember Richardson has brought this forward in a very thoughtful and thorough way with steps outlined in ways that the community can give meaningful engagement in this process. We know that the naming of public spaces and buildings is requires much reflection and even more so when we recognize and honor individuals by the nature of our humanity. None of us is perfect and critics will find something wrong with any potential honoree. So in in this process, not only considering the contributions, but the context is incredibly important. Each generation will define for themselves who they find to be heroic, who they find to be role models. And as I stand here, the mother of children, the ages of people who just spoke to you, they're defining this very clearly as who represents them, who inspires them. I hear it again and again in the short time that we've been talking with this publicly. The response I get from children as young as ten and 14 is, That's great. She's so cool. They really understand that this is a person who speaks to them. And so as we continue to develop North Long Beach into the most technologically advanced and modern education corridor from the construction of Jordan High School, a potential community center and this library looking forward with this naming, is absolutely the right thing to do. And I thank you for your affirmative vote in moving this process forward. Thank you, board member Kirk. Good evening. I'm a I'm the one who always groans when they have these long speaker lines. And here I am, part of it. Good evening. My name is Dr. Johnny Rex O.D., and I'm a resident at Long Beach living in the Forest Park on the 300 block of South Street. Over the course of the last year, I've been to many city council meetings to support several initiatives that have been put forth this year to better Long Beach and better my community. Most of the time I choose not to speak, not because I don't feel like I have something to say or feel that I have a voice . But because many of the voices advocating on behalf of our community are voices I trust to communicate the needs of the community I reside in and reflect the shared vision many of us have for the new trajectory we are paving in the Uptown Renaissance. Today I stand before you because some of the voices weighing in on the proposal are not voices I believe accurately reflect the new North and this collective vision. And I want to make it unequivocally clear that I am genuinely excited about the prospect of naming our library after the current first lady. And let me tell you why. With communities in transition just like ours in North Long Beach, it is important to have symbols to rally around, to demonstrate that there's something special about our community. These symbols can take a myriad of forms. We currently have the opportunity to combine the pride and excitement we feel when we think about our brand new library with a public figure that inspires us to new and higher levels. Who encourages us to expect more from ourselves and more from those around us, including our elected officials? A public figure that inspires the next generation, the next generation of future leaders of our great city of Long Beach. I think we can all agree that our goal in making Long Beach a destination city is to make sure all parts of Long Beach have destination points for local, regional, national and international visitors. Right now, we in the north are in a time of rebranding. Determining what this new trajectory will look like and what legacies we will leave for the next generation. The old connotations and assumptions about North Long Beach are slowly fade into the background as the new short as the new North is being shaped and molded. Let's continue to be progressive, to be out of the box thinkers and to be a community that inspires and aspires. So I will end with Go Long Beach and go uptown. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good evening, Honorable Mayor. City Council. My name is Andy Kerr from the eighth District and I felt compelled this evening to speak on this issue for a couple of different reasons. First of all, I'm currently in the eighth District, but I spent the first 25 years of my life at Orange and 64th, right across the street from Grant Elementary School in North Long Beach. And so the North Long Beach community is very dear to my heart. And I still spent a lot of time there. And the North Branch Library was very important to me as I was growing up. So I was very excited to hear a couple of years ago about the the new building that will be happening for that community and very excited about that. I was the first member of my family to graduate from college and in addition to my parents who threatened me within an inch of my life if I didn't. I also think the North Branch Library Library for teaching me a love of learning, a love of books because of the hours and the hours that I spent there. And the other issue I went to to speak on tonight was as a member of the Homeless Services Committee representing the eighth District and Councilman Austin. And you, Mr. Mayor, and I've also have been a member, a board member of an organization named Housing Works, which provides permanent supportive housing for people who are chronically homeless, at risk of homelessness. And many of those people that that my organization and the homeless services people in the city of Long Beach have served have been veterans . And Mrs. Obama has been an incredible leader on that issue. I have seen my organization, Housing Works, House Veterans, who have been on the streets, living on the streets virtually for my entire life from the Vietnam War era, and have seen them go to housing because of the leadership of Mrs. Obama, because the Veterans Administration now gets what it takes to end chronic homelessness among veterans. But it wouldn't have happened if it hadn't been for her leadership. And with. Because of your leadership, Mr. Mayor, and the council and our wonderful staff here, I'm proud to say that the city of Long Beach is on pace to reach the goals set by Mrs. Obama to end veterans homelessness in the city of Long Beach. And I'm very proud of that. So that's all I have to say. Thank you. Thank you. Makes me feel. Good evening, Mayor and City Council Persons. I'm Liz Gonzalez. I'm an educator and a creative writer. And we are celebrating our sixth year as homeowners in North Long Beach in Eagle North. My name is George Martin. I'm a biologist and musician and part of Uptown Ward. Together we run Uptown Word Reading and Arts Series, which we began in North Long Beach. One of our missions is to promote literacy and in addition to bring writers to North Long Beach that represent the community. And then that means people of color. It was so important to us to do this. We didn't have a venue, so we held pop up events every month. And starting next month, January, we will now have a home at North Branch Library. And we just wanted to say, as people who promote the letters, promote literacy and the arts, that we wholeheartedly support this recommendation . As a girl, I grew up going to libraries and I would have loved to have had a role model like Michelle Obama and been able to attend a library named after her. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good evening. My name is Charles Durning. I'm a 60 year resident of Plus of Long Beach. It's wonderful to hear the enthusiasm for this new library. And though I may offer up another alternative, it's like standing on the beach with a tsunami or global warming. We may all end up north Long Beach. But having said that. We do have a city policy in place, and I think that policy stands for a lifetime of service. We have many people in North Long Beach that that perhaps could qualify under that. I offer up two people that were husband and wife. They were Judge Marcus and Indira Hale. Tucker. Judge Judge Tucker was an African-American. He was the first judge to be put on a municipal court. He was long recognized for his position on youth. And if he had someone on probation and they didn't make their grades, he left them on probation. Indira Hale. Tucker had a passion for books. She she had a program at our libraries where the new kids could come in. And not only could they take out books, but they could take out toys. She she started the resource center for. The African American Society. She coauthored a book on the heritage of African-Americans in Long Beach with Aaron De. She was a founding member, excuse me, of our Long Beach Public Library Foundation. I think the other thing that is a consideration and if we do go forward with this Mrs. Obama's name, I would challenge all of our counseling and council women. The goal is to raise $700,000 for North Shore Branch Library for their computer learning center and the other electronic and books that they need. I would challenge you to be of assistance in raising that money so that we could have the best library possible in north our region. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next speaker, please. And I'm going to I see a I'm going to close out the speakers listening to anybody else. There's two more. Okay. So I'm going to close off theirs. Okay. So after the next the folks that are coming up, I'm closing the speaker's list. Yes, sir. Good evening to the council, to Mayor Garcia. My name is Otis Hogan. I'm a member of the Human Relations Commission and chair of the Highland Park Neighborhood Association. I've been most inspired this evening by the people who are the community members who came before me, especially the young people who spoke earlier. But moving on as a 16 year old transplant to the city, the Long Beach Library and Long Beach Poly was what first inspired me to develop a lifelong love for Long Beach. So when it comes to the. Library. Project with love and appreciation, I believe the whole North Long Beach community is pleased and excited to see the new library take shape on Atlantic Avenue. I am here today inspired and excited at the prospect of this building being named after the First Lady. I, for one, and I know many others in our community. Will be proud to be a patron and supporter of the Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library. Thank you. Go uptown. Go Long Beach. Right. Go Long Beach. Next speaker, please. Good evening. I'm Marco Cooper and I represent Andy Street, which is located in North Long Beach. And any street community is and supports Councilmember Rex Richardson's proposal to name the new library after Michelle Obama. The if you look at the demographic in North Long Beach, it consists of many African-Americans, according to statistics. People are more likely to associate themselves with places that they can relate to. Michelle Obama being African-American will shake more kids in the community. The library is named after her. The first lady is a great role model that the kids in our community can look up to, given that she has similarities with the youth in the city . After construction is complete, the 25,000 square foot library will be a great location to get kids in the neighborhood, a place to get resources or do homework after school. However, more than that can be accomplished by naming it after the First Lady. She's a perfect example of what hard work and determination can get you. People will always be more supportive of a person they look up to. Obama is a respected woman throughout the community because she's an advocate for education and has earned her own degrees at Princeton and Harvard Law School. If Obama's name is attached to the new public library, it will send the message that if kids work hard enough, some day they will be able to accomplish as much as she had. Or even or maybe even more. North Lawn Beach has improved over the past several years. However, we still have room for improvement, namely the new library. After Michelle Obama will give guidance and inspiration to kids throughout the community to strive day in and day out to reach their goals. If the City Council approves the proposal, it could be huge for the community. It will give African-American kids hope, knowing that the biggest neighborhood branch library in the city is named after an African-American woman. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good evening. Everyone. Mayor Council members. My name is Charlie Scott. The third and I grew up in Long Beach. You know, I. Went to Hamilton Middle. School. I then went to Long. Beach, Jordan go Panthers. After that, I went to Cal State, Long Beach. And I've just been rooted in the community and in this community. My parents still live. In the same house like this is where we lived north Long Beach. And at this point in my life, I have seen it evolve into a place that other places in Long. Beach are saying, what's. Going on and the. Renaissance down in North Long Beach. And I didn't. Say we're looking forward to a new library. And in this library, the name we're looking forward. To see. On it is Michelle. Obama. Neighborhood Library. I'm up here standing before you to speak to you for. My little niece that was just born in October. Because as she grows up, she's going to make her way to Grant Elementary School at Grant Elementary School. She's going to then go to the library and then the library. She's going to see this name, Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library. And in that library, she's going to understand that she comes from North Long. Beach, from the. Stop that we come from. And she can not only make it to the White House, but change as a catalyst for the rest of the world. So I stand for of first. And then I stand for. Myself. And then I stand as a voice of the community to say to everyone here, we're all people from Long Beach and we all. Want best. For what's for Long Beach in this. Moment right now. And I'm asking. You to vote and. Say. Michelle Obama. Neighborhood Library on the north side of Long Beach. Where I came from. Now. It's a new. Name. It's a new library. And it's. A new direction. Because in North Long Beach, it's time for a new direction. It's time to be able to. See someone. That mirror images or reflects who we are as. A community. And in this community. We are strong, we are intellectual, and we are thriving right now. This is the next phase of what North Long Beach will. Become in the next 22 years. For Alyssa. My name is Charlie. Scott, the third. And again, I'm speaking to you on behalf of. The Michelle Obama. Neighborhood Library. Vote for the library. Let's let's do something to make our youth proud of our. Decisions in the future. Thank you. Thank you, Mike. Speaker, please. And I have three more speakers and lady at the end is the last speaker. Lori Margaret Smith, you're in line. Okay. No, that's okay. So we have four more speakers. That's okay. Thank you. Lori Angell. I've lived in North Long Beach since 1989. I've seen the neighborhood change substantially, yet I am still there. A lot of people left, but I am still there. And many like me stayed. And we fought for almost everything that people are enjoying right now, including the library. 15 years working on the library. Now, my head's getting turned a little bit today because first of all, Michelle Obama doesn't come up in my vernacular very often. I read the newspaper, I read magazines, I watch the news every single night. I watch intently. And I have not heard any of this about Michelle Obama before. So seriously, I am serious. I'm not lying. I'm being very serious. Let's make sure everyone has a has a right to make their comments. And if I could just have the audience, please be respectful. So I appreciate greatly getting the perspective of the individuals in the audience. That being said, I've been looking forward for 15 years for the completion of the North Branch Library to celebrate North Long Beach. What I am concerned about is that this is coming up now. We're going to have to pay $47,000 to change this and change that and put in a new sign. Why didn't this come up two years ago? Why couldn't the why couldn't the neighborhood and the community discuss this two years ago? Why now? Why three days before Christmas? Is this coming up now? So that's my objection. I think the process is really fouled up and I'm disappointed that this is where we are. I've been speaking against this naming because I don't know who Michelle Obama is. I know who she is. But I equate her to politics. I equate her to being the wife of who I consider a very good leader. And I don't feel that most first ladies deserve this kind of recognition. I would like to see President Hillary Clinton lie very personally, but that's just me. So good luck. I'm hoping for more discussion and I'm just a little disappointed that this wasn't better discussed in the neighborhood. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Thank you. Good evening, Mayor Garcia. Vice Mayor Lowenthal, City Council members. My name is Margaret Smith. I live in the third district. My address on file, and I am speaking as a former president and vice president of public affairs for the Long Beach Public Library Foundation. We are really, really excited to be a part of this discussion about the transformative potential of the new North Library. Many have asked us. What is the Foundation's position on the naming of North Library? You heard from Kate Huizar, our executive director. I would like to. Quickly summarize. Our key three positions. First of all, there is much discussion about who should be honored. We are not not taking a position on any specific individual. There are many deserving candidates. Let the community decide. Secondly, we are most concerned about the process, both for North Library and for future naming opportunities. We are glad to know that the process will be transparent and inclusive of the entire Long Beach community and we are very appreciative of Councilmember Richardson's commitment to that approach. Last. Whatever the decision about the name. As was said earlier, the foundation will continue its active campaign of support and fundraising to make this an amazing north library for all of the individuals here tonight and the entire community. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next speaker, please. 30 2:00 as they address a number of items. First of all, one of the things I think everybody can agree on when the time comes to make that announcement of who the library will be named after. And if we select Steve Harvey, let's make sure that the teleprompter is working. Okay? My affinity for the library is not limited to the nexus I referenced last week relative to the having a relative that who designed the L.A. Public Library. My mother was a librarian and in the small world department earned her degree from the same place that Eleanor Richardson. Who for 20 years was our director of Librarian Services. I went to school. I was. I clearly support the building of the library, in fact. When you first announced it a number of months ago, I gave you the I think will probably be one of the first books there, The Boys in the Boat, which parenthetically, if you have not read, you should read. It is a tremendous, tremendous book. On what life was like in the deepest depths of the Depression in this country. Some of those experiences we're expressing, we're experiencing right here and now. One of the things and I mentioned this to Councilman Rex Richardson that struck me and I was a little disturbed about. I see only the signs from one side. That tells me the process wasn't completely open, period. I've been down to this council chamber one or two times, and when there are major issues, they're generally people equally in number represented and so forth. And I don't see that here tonight. That's a little troubling. Equally troubling was the fact that people were referencing it's people of color. I don't give a rat's rear end what color somebody is, and that should not matter whatsoever. People are saying, well, right now we've got 90% or whatever the percentage of African-American. The realities are. With by the time ten years from now, 15 years ago, 15 years from now, that profile is going to change. And if you don't understand that, look at the changes, the population and the migrations into this country. It might be Syria. It might be Muslim. It might be Irish. You never know. So let's check that at the door. Somebody once said, you know, it's not the content, it's not the color of the stain, but the content of the mind. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. Equally important, if you want to. I think that would be an embarrassment to the first lady because she doesn't want to be seen as being elbowed. Elbowing your way in. Last comment. Time is up. Study Google and study the China. Thank you, Mr. Cole. You know, understand time is the time is out. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Good evening, honorable mayor. Members of the Council, ladies and gentlemen. I want to thank you all for affording me the honor of speaking here tonight. Here are a few suggestions that I. That have an opportunity to please all involved. I'm sorry. Just to get your name for the record. I'll run it. I live in ninth district for tomorrow. Perfect. Thank you. I live in the ninth district. The policy in Long Beach is to name a public asset after someone who has been dead over a year. Although it can be overridden, it shouldn't be. There are solid, significant reasons for that policy. Michelle Obama is still alive. The history books have not yet been. Finalized about her. And I'm sure the. Force is with her as well as everyone else here today. She will have a very long life ahead of her. With a lot more history to write. We cannot begin to predict that a person who is so young will always deserve the designation being proposed here today. However, the aforementioned city policy does not extend to school districts. A suggestion would be to the youth of Jordan and all the other schools in Long Beach work at a designated special area in their school honoring the First Lady so that all of the future generations may be reminded every day of Michelle Obama as an inspiration for their dreams, aspirations, goals and personal achievements. If the north Long Beach. North Lawn. North Library branches to be named after someone. There's strong support for the name Mr. Bill Baker. Also, Judge Tucker. I can find many facts that point to them as the reason the library has become a reality in our neighborhood. Years before our current councilman took office. With all due respect. His support, their support over the years and dedication should be an inspiration to all of us where many may have given up. Another suggestion would be to honor our veterans. There's strong veterans support in North Long Beach and the veteran theme is already going down Atlantic. Or just simply leave the library name in honor of our great city where I. Am proud to live. And have dedicated many hours to its improvement. Thank you. Thank you very much. I think that closes public comment there. I think everyone spoke. Okay, good. So let me take this. Let me take this back and I'll make a few comments and I have a couple I have one other comment and then we'll go to to the motion. So let me let me just say, first of all, that I want to thank everyone for coming. And regardless of, you know, what do you think the library should be named or shouldn't be named? This is important part of the process. So thank you all for coming. I especially want to thank and congratulate all the young people that came out tonight. And it it makes it makes me very proud that there's youth in our community, in our schools that are so active in what's happening in the city and the fact that they felt compelled to to come up with an idea about a name of a pretty important, significant building, public building that we're building. And the present that to Councilman Richardson, I think, is really, really special. And regardless of what you think of the name, I think that's something that should make everyone proud of our of our youth in the city of Long Beach. I think just as a point of of, you know, of clarification and this has been brought up. We look at all of our institutions in Long Beach, and I think there's been a lot of great suggestions that have been that have been made. We have a we have what I would call a pretty decent mix of folks that are that our buildings are named after. Some are national figures. We're across the street from Lincoln Park or Cesar Chavez Park. Are there are more local to our history, whether it's Drake Park or other names that we've made? Some are or are authors or folks that we aspire or love something about, like Mark Twain, which was the last, I think, library name that we name that we that we chose for for our last big library in in central Long Beach. And sometimes we name things for folks that are that are still with us that have made great contributions like we just did for Beverly O'Neil, who is the former mayor of Long Beach. And so the city, I think, has always had a process in as long as I've been here. It has always began with a councilmember from that district who was the elected representative of that district, would bring forward a name and a process for the council to consider. And I think that's what's what's happened through this. I know not everyone loves a name and that's okay, but I think that's something that there is a process. And I just want to remind us that the actual agenda item is pretty clearly states for the council to consider this and then to begin a public outreach and deliberation process over the course of, I'm assuming, over the next few weeks or months. So that's all been said. Personally, I'll say that. When I think about particularly women and young women and young girls to be able to look up at a library and be able to see the name of someone that inspires them, that represents them, that looks like them, I think is something very, very special. And so I think I think our first lady is I, I think someone I read in a comment or somebody sent me an email that mentioned, you know, she's she's just the wife of the president. And I would say that he is probably the president because he married Michelle Obama. And and I think that, you know, she probably anyone that she married would probably one day become the president. And so I think listen, I think she personally I think she is a incredible choice, that name on a public building, I think. But that doesn't also mean that there aren't other incredible names that could consider. And I think that's important to say, because she is a great a great name. But all the other names that have been mentioned, some great people in our own local history, I think in the press telegram mentioned three or four African-American leaders that have been very influential. They're all of value. And I think that's important to note for everyone. Everyone that's been named has done and made incredible contributions to our city. And we should value whether they're a national leader and they impact things like like our veterans or our education policies nationwide that affect our local schools or whether they're folks like were mentioned earlier, someone that led the way on legal issues. That was our first municipal judge. That was African-American or first African-American, a woman librarian. All sorts of different names are out there that are all worthy. Not one is not more worthy than than the other. They've all contributed. One thing that I the councilman and I mentioned earlier, and I want to make sure and I'll bring this up and I think that he is very open to this and I think is encouraging is when when when this gets built. And over the course of the next few weeks, as we discuss this and the Library Foundation is involved and others are involved, there's a lot of people that went and were involved in the process of this library and a lot of great leaders. And I've heard actually a lot of great women that have been involved as well. And so I think that there's opportunities as we look at the library, whether they're reading rooms, whether they're spaces around the grounds to also be able to honor all of these great leaders, women, community leaders that all were a part of this important building. And so, Councilman, I'm hopeful that as this process moves forward, that regardless of what the final name ends up being, and I certainly know that the Michelle Obama name has a lot of support, that we look at ways of honoring all of our local champions as well. And I know that you were supportive of that. And so, councilman. So, Mayor, I'm absolutely I've committed this to two former council members. I've had this conversation with former council members. We just had a brief conversation with the Library Foundation. I think there's plenty of opportunities to to highlight our local leaders, and I think we should do that. I've heard names. I remember Bill Baker was around when I first started working for the city, and I had tremendous respect for him. And I know Dr. Marks, but Judge Tucker is, you know, comes up in and there are a lot of I think it would be really interesting and looking at how we can highlight other women in Long Beach and around our grounds of our library, other establishments, and we have a main library coming up. So I really think that this is an interesting catalyst moment for us to really kind of look holistically about how we how we make sure everyone has some attention and we and we think strategically about how we also raise money for our establishments. So. Absolutely. Mr. Mayor. Great. Well, thank you. And I want to thank all of you for for coming out and for supporting something, especially the young folks, for making what I think is really a great suggestion. And so thank you, guys for for doing that. And with that, I want. To finally just say I just want to say thank you to everyone who who took the time to come out both sides of the issue. You guys were very passionate. I heard a few things. People said, oh, I was moved by the comment or I may not have known very much about the first lady, but this is the community process. This is the beginning. And I'm hoping that we have a strong community as a result as a result of this. So thank you so much. Thank you very much. And with that, there is a motion and a second. And again, the motion is for the council to consider the new North Branch Library as the Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library and request library services and Department of Parks to conduct outreach and engage youth and library patrons around the naming of the library and move and to move forward. And so thank you for that. Please cast your votes. Motion carries. Okay. Thank you. And thank you all for for coming out on this issue. Thank you. And then we're going to continue our meeting. I know. I'm sure most of you won't stay, which is okay. So just if I could just ask you as you exit, just to, you know, be as quiet as possible so we can continue the meeting. Thank you very much. If I can just do the consent calendar real quick. Okay. There's a motion and a second. Is there any public comment on consent? KC Nunn members, please cast your votes.

On the message and order, referred on November 17, 2021 Docket #1167, authorizing the City of Boston to accept and expend the amount of Thirteen Million Five Hundred Twenty Thousand Dollars ($13,520,000.00) in the form of a grant for the Federal FY21 Urban Areas Security Initiative, awarded by the United States Department of Homeland Security, passed through the MA Executive Office of Public Safety & Security, to be administered by the Mayor’s Office of Emergency Management. The fund will continue to support planning, exercises, trainings and operations that build regional capacities to help prevent, respond to and recover from threats or acts of terrorism, including Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear and Explosive incidents, the committee submitted a report recommending the order ought to pass.

BostonCC_12152021_2021-1167

1167 Certainly. Docket 1167 message in order authorizing the city of Boston to accept and expend an amount of $13,520,000 in the form of a grant for the federal FBI 21 Urban Areas Security Initiative awarded by the United States Department of Homeland Security Executive Office of Public Safety and Security to be administered by the Mayor's Office of Emergency Management. The fund will continue to support planning exercises, training operations that build regional capacity to help prevent, respond to and recover from threats or acts of terrorism, including chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and explosive, explosive incidents. Thank you, Madam Clerk. The Chair recognizes Councilor Campbell, Chair of Public Safety and Criminal Justice. Councilor Campbell, you have the floor. I thank you, Madam President. The Committee on Public Safety and Criminal Justice held a hearing this past Monday. We actually held it on three dockets. We'll talk about the other two later in the agenda. But for now, I'll just talk about docket 1167. We heard from the Mayor's Office of Emergency Management Chief Charmaine Benford, who testified on behalf of the administration. Docket 1167 is a grant from the Urban Areas Security Initiative. It is administered by OEM. The grant will fund continued support for planning, exercises, trainings and operations that build regional capacities to help prevent, respond and recover from threats or acts of terrorism, including chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and explosive incidents. Chief Benford explained that this grant provides infrastructure support for OEM and the city's primary public safety disciplines in being able to maintain, of course, a readiness posture for safety and security threats. It is awarded to a region and this region includes Boston, Brookline, Cambridge, Chelsea, Everett, Quincy Revere, Somerville and Winthrop, for which the city of Boston serves as the fiduciary. It's managed by FEMA within the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. The funds and the application are submitted by the state through AIOPS. And then, of course, it comes back to the city of Boston to actually dish out and allocate these funds. OEM collaborates with various regional partners to allocate these funds using a risk based methodology. This is going to be a little long. I apologize. The eight specific mission areas of the grant include several safety and security, which the breakdowns were sent to. All councilors, of course, who can review those. But $1 million for that critical infrastructure and protection. $2 million. Intelligence and information sharing. $3.1 million. Interoperable communications $2.2 million. Chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and explosive detect. Detection and response. 1.6 million public health and emergency services $430,000, which also includes planning and community preparedness at 1.2 million. And lastly, cyber security at 1.2 million. There are further breakdowns in this. I sent this all to various councilors, some documents before the hearing, some documents during the hearing, and some documents that we received this morning from the various departments. A significant portion of these funds come from the Program Administration Fund and allow for much of this to serve some human capital. There were significant and I want to acknowledge that there were some concerns about the grants effect with respect to compliance of the surveillance, the new surveillance oversight ordinance and the funding of risk. And Chief Benford explained that the grant will, of course, be in compliance with that new ordinance that was passed by the Council. All of the new councilors and of course, the new mayor will have to ensure that happens, particularly with the procurement of any new additional technology. I also note that there were several questions that we forwarded to the BRIC and we did get some responses to those. Councilor Arroyo. I will just say more detail than we've received in the past, which I really appreciated in such a short timeframe. I also will stress that because this is a regional grant, some of this, of course, is within the control of other municipalities. So what they procure, for example, for their security, their safety may be different from what the city of Boston procures. And obviously they do not have the ordnance that Boston has. So there are different provisions that are in play. But here in the city of Boston, we got more information about what some of this regional technology will be. Some of it includes critical infrastructure monitoring system maintenance, which is referred to as Sims. This is an existing camera network that is a regional project. This will also include gunshot detection system, which is also a regional project. There is a license plate reader program that is not actually include Boston and includes some of the other regions. So it's not a project that DPD participates in. So this is some of the major technology that will be funded by this, and this will probably about be about 10.2% of the budget in terms of the BRIC. There are several positions that will be funded by the BRIC, and we know that this came up before with a previous grant of $850,000 that the council decided to hold because we didn't get as much transparency in responses to those questions. This, I think, is a little different here. We got specifics around what they will be funding these for. Analyst positions. I know that folks have questions about, well, what will they be analyzing? That's going to be a question for the new council, the new mayor to have to go through. They obviously have not been hired yet. And I would implore the council and the new mayor to do just that, to follow this, to continue, of course, to follow BRIC, to encourage greater transparency from the agency, and in addition to greater transparency, greater accountability and greater partnership, hopefully with the Council. I will just add, because the funding for the BRIC was folded into this regional grant, which is over $13 million. I am going to recommend that it be passed and that we pass it as a council because it includes so many regions and so many necessary equipment items and various infrastructure supplies that every department, every municipality absolutely needs. And also I will just add some of this infrastructure and supplies go to support our efforts with respect to COVID, which we know is still, of course, devastating of the Commonwealth. And I'll just add one more point. I just want to thank the councilors who actually attended thank you to councilors Brayden, Murphy, Arroyo and Flynn for joining the hearing and following up. Thank you to Sean Tall, who is over here for getting us responses really quickly. And thank you to Chief Benford, who, as he said, prides himself on transparency with respect to O&M. He was incredible at the hearing. He did not have all the answers, but he worked really quick with air to get as many responses as we could. So I'm recommending passage, but of course, asking that capacity issue. God bless you. The council colleagues as well as the new mayor continue. I think the advocacy of this body, continued advocacy of this committee in ensuring that certain departments connected to public safety in the city of Boston are transparent, are continuing to do the work, of course , of rooting out racial disparities, which we all see still exist in our response and our public safety response. So thank you for allowing me to go on a little bit long. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you so much. Councilor Campbell seeks acceptance of the committee report and passage of Docket 11 six. Thank God this is the last. Of. These red. Lights. Thank you so much. The chair recognizes Councilor Royal Council role. You have the. Floor. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you to chair of Public Safety Catholic Campbell for a very good summation. I'll be voting yes on this, but I do so with reservations, largely based on the the so the truth is, this is much more information than we received on that grant. It is not very close. And I'm assuming the reason for that is the size of the number here. And my vote yes for this is largely for the reasons that you detail. There's regional partners here. There's there's other communities involved in this. And what I will say, which is sort of just a notice for for the for for both Boston reasons intelligence center for the administration I think also for the council is that most of their answers were we're going to comply with the, uh, surveillance oversight that we passed and check back us, back up with us in August of 2022 when we put together our report. And I think it's important that we just because I was kind of stunned at the amount or the lack of amount of say in where these funds go that OEM had given other the administrator their more of a pass through. They they ask for the grant they get the grant but they couldn't detail exactly what was going to be done with the grant, who was going to be doing what with the grant, whether or not, for instance, these analysts are going to be using the gang database, are going to be focused more on regional counterintelligence for terrorism or things of that nature. And so I look forward to in August of 2022, going through this and making sure that we do this, because I believe this is the annual grant and this is something that we will have the ability to ensure compliance moving forward with, with our ordinances, with the things that we have dictated we would like to see from a transparency, uh, for transparency sake moving forward because, because of the surveillance oversight, we should have more say in terms of what that information that they're doing and what they are doing with these dollars, because this is not a small amount of money and so we'll be voting for it. But with the, uh, just with the notice for everybody who's still going to be here, anybody who's joining that, we still have work to do on ensuring that they, that this is money that is being used properly, that is being used in a way that is the most positive for our community. So thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Madam Chair, for for your leadership. Thank you so much. Does anyone else want to speak on this? Okay, great. Councilor Campbell seeks acceptance of the committee report and passage of Docket 1167. All those in favor, please indicate by saying I may oppose. The ayes have it. The docket 1167 has passed. Thank you so much, Madam Clerk. Let's take the next four dockets together. Docket 1168, 1169, 1170 and 1171. Great. Thank you. Docket 1168. Message in order. Authorize the city of Boston to accept. And an amount of 2,000,007 $70,874 in the form of a grant for the f y 22 Title three C Award by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services passed to the Master Executive Office of Elder appears to be administered by the H

Recommendation to adopt resolution declaring a vacancy in the office of: Member of the City Council for the Fourth Council District;

LongBeachCC_12162014_14-1047

Item number 18, report from City Clerk Recommendation to adopt a resolution declaring a vacancy in the office of the fourth Council District. Adopt a resolution ordinance ordering, calling, providing for and giving notice of a special municipal election to be held on Tuesday, April 14, 2015, for the remainder of the term of office, terminating on the third Tuesday of July 2016 and adopt a resolution requesting the Board of Supervisors of the County of Los Angeles to render specified services to the city related to the conduct of a special municipal election. So well, actually, before we go there. I just want to make sure the city attorney, city attorney parking. There are three pieces or are there? There's there are two pieces to this. Right. I believe that one is declaring the vacancy, which is a separate piece. Is that correct? That's one. Do you want explain that process to the council? Yes, Mayor. Members of the council, you are correct. We have two action items before you this evening. Action item one is the declaration of the vacancy, which is required by the charter, and then items two and three can be taken together. And that's the calling for the special election, which is also required by the charter. So we actually we do have two different items. So let's let's begin with the first the first item, which is the declaring the vacancy where there has been a second in a motion to declare the vacancy. And then we'll get to the second piece in a minute. Any public comment on the declaration of the vacancy? Casing and did did Councilman Mungo, do you want to speak to this? Not the second one. Okay. Councilor Brosnan, do you want to speak to this or the second one? Okay, Members, please go and cast your vote. Motion carry six zero. Okay, now we are on the second item, which is adopting a resolution and calling for the election before we do that. Studio Kerr Did you want to make any, any staff report on this or no? Just everyone. Okay.

Recommendation to request City Attorney to prepare amendments to Long Beach Municipal Code Sections 2.01.380 and 2.01.1020, relating to Officeholder accounts. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_01062015_14-0717

Next item, please. Item 23 is a report from the office of Councilwoman Lena Gonzales, chair of the Elections Oversight Committee. And there's a recommendation to request the city attorney to prepare amendments to the municipal code relating to office holder accounts. Councilman Gonzalez. Yes. So I first wanted to as the chair of the Elections Oversight Committee, I wanted to thank our committee members, Councilmember Muranga and Councilmember Mongo, for their diligence in helping to bring our election finance codes up to law. I'm sorry. Finance laws up to state code. In addition to modernizing a lot of our antiquated policies currently, such as office holder account moneys. And I believe these monies would allow council members to reach out to local nonprofits and participate in a meaningful way in their local communities, such as helping organizations to sustain and grow and bringing up the amounts for the officeholder account still puts Long Beach under the average. For instance, the city of Anaheim has about 1500 dollars contribution limit with no cap on how much to raise. Just to give you an idea. So I would. Like to make the motion, although someone else made the motion to approve. But second, I was like in that, but I'd love to move this forward. There's a motion by Councilmember Ranga and seconded by Councilwoman Gonzalez. That's okay. Thank you. On on the item to Councilwoman Gonzalez makes the motion and Councilwoman Gonzales and Councilmember Ranga has made a second on on this item. Let me first take public comment and then I do have some council questions. Any public comment on the item saying not in closing public comment. Let me go back to Council Councilwoman Price. Thank you. I'm interested in a little bit of background in terms of why we think we need to raise the limit. So I'm hoping that someone on the committee can maybe educate me a little bit on why we need to change the limits at this time. Sure. Well, I know that we had lengthy discussions over 2 hours, I think, in each of our elections oversight committee meetings. But I think the the issue here was that we had still been behind relative to other cities and comparative to other cities actually have a chart, like I had mentioned, City of Anaheim, which is fairly comparative to our city, has a contribution limit of 1500 dollars per person and no spending limits at all. And the city of L.A., some something similar as well. So, you know, this allows us more opportunity to be able to fundraise, but in a way that would give back to our local communities. I mean, officeholders are intended for that. They're not intended for specific campaign purposes. It is to give back to our local communities, which many of us have done already with our officeholder accounts. And I appreciate that. Thank you so much for sharing that. I do. I. I. Respect the work that the members of the committee have done and really do defer to you in terms of the work that you've done and your recommendation that carries a lot of weight with me. My concerns are whether in terms of let me just go first to office holder, whether we really need that. $25,000 seems like a lot of money for us to be raising. And what concerns me is that our service on the council to a municipality will turn focus into fundraising and that much of our term will be committed to trying to fundraise. And that certainly is not an area that we should be focused on during our term of service. I understand that getting elected requires money, and I completely understand that having gone through the process. But I am concerned that our focus as electeds will become more emphasized on raising money that we may not necessarily need. I know that there are a lot of programs that we can do for our district, and I do know that in the past some have raised the maximum amount and some districts haven't raised any money in their officeholder account, and yet they're still able to service their client, their their constituents the best way that they can , given the resources that are available to the city without having to have fundraisers and things. So that's that's my my biggest concern is that it's going to create an environment where fundraising is going to be a priority and something that is going to be an unnecessary focus for all of us. And I just was wondering if that amount came from some some study of maybe what has happened in Long Beach in terms of people reaching the maximum and wanting more or needing more to do certain events. I know that in the third district we haven't always maxed out on the office holder, and there's a lot of pressure when that amount is raised to 25,000 too, to find the money and fundraise. To do that. I just don't want our focus to be on fundraising. I want it to be on doing what we can to serve. So having said that, I you know, that's why I wanted to know kind of what the thought process was, because I do respect the work that the committee has put into this. But some of us may not enjoy fundraising, and so we just want to do our service. And this kind of raises the limits to the point where it makes fundraising an issue. Okay. The other I know you asked a question of the committee members, so let me ask, have the other member of the committee also if there's anything else to add, and then I'll go through the speaker's list. Councilman Mongeau. So and Lina knows this very well. I, too, was concerned about potentially raising these limits. On the other hand, there are lots of things that this community needs that I am not comfortable spending our tax dollars on. And so one of the things that this does for us as council members is it empowers us to be able to fund concerts in the park and other things where general fund money that really needs to go to pay the salaries of our employees and pay for the streets and sidewalks and trees. So this this is another opportunity to help in that way. Additionally, from discussions of this fundraising opportunity, I hope to bring before the EDF sponsorship opportunities where those organizations would be able to sponsor the city directly. But recently, when approached by someone and told that they tried to sponsor something in Parks and Rec and they got a a list back that they could buy a park bench, I think that they were looking to be more generous and perhaps sponsor the entire concert in the Park series, and that mechanism does not currently exist. And so this is a tool in the meantime to be able to fund a lot of the programs that Dee does in his community, the concerts in the park that are in both of our communities. And we have a lot of single mom events in our side of town as well. And so this is an interim mechanism until the city is in a position to have greater sponsorship and partnership from nonprofits and corporate businesses. Thank you. Next, we have Councilmember Ranga and then Councilmember Richardson. In regards to the limits, it's that limited. Are there not enough? Basically, when we're looking at what we specifically if you look at that, I'm not getting paid for being on the city council. I am doing my community service here. So the only way that I am able to fund any activities outside of the office is through my office holder account and my office holder account. Basically, right at this point in time, I was fortunate I was able to finish my campaign with a surplus to put into an office holder account that helped me in my first initial weeks and months of office to be able to sponsor a few events. So what this does basically is provides us an avenue as elected officials to use our own officeholder accounts to provide toy giveaways, to sponsor events, in part to donate ads or buy ads or buy programs for community based organizations, for non-profits to help them in their fundraising. It's an opportunity for us to give back to the community that elected us by not using our own office accounts to do that. And like I say, and specifically me, I have no access to that account whatsoever. I'm not getting paid, and I can't use the office to pay for anything other than what I can do myself personally through my officeholder kind of candidate. The other thing you mentioned in regards to changing our focus, the focus is our focus. If we focus ourselves on providing our community service. That is our emphasis. I have not changed my focus in terms of my community in regard to service to them. I am not fundraising. I am not changing my emphasis to community service and to community fundraising. And that is not my purpose here. My purpose is to serve in the city council, to serve my constituents and end the city of Long Beach. If I were to do that, if I were to start changing my focus into solely fundraising so that I could do these other things, then I'm in here for the wrong reason . So I don't take your criticism lightly in that respect. I do respect it, but I don't you know, it's it's something that I think we have to put our emphasis on. What are we here for? And if we're here to serve our communities, we need to be given. Greer it. We have to have the tools for us to do that. And one of those tools is by having an office holder account that will provide us the avenue and the means by which to help our constituents in our non-profits around the city. The other one last item that was brought up, and that's about, you know, being more susceptible to special interests through fundraising. Again, that that that's up to the that's up to the candidate. That's up to the elected official as to who and what they they go after and what they accept. And it's a it's an issue that is personal to every candidate and to every elected official and how they spend those moneys. And I'm sure that I've talked to many potential contributors, not only to me, but to others as well, who say, you know, we're just going to give you your donation, we're going to help you with your officeholder account. But you're free to do with that money as you please. And there's no commitments to it. There's no ties into it. It's so that we can provide and do the work that we want to do for our constituents. So I just want to emphasize that that the officeholder account is ours to use in our discretion. At our discretion, and it's our funds. Thank you. Next, we have Councilman Richardson. Thanks. So I think that the committee's done great work. And I don't want I don't want to justify the need for tremendous need that's really in our community. I think most folks understand the needs of their Viera, their respective communities were elected to represent. I think that our council and our communities, our city has come through a difficult time over recent years. I remember when council offices were hit with $20,000 budget cuts consecutive consecutive years, staff was diminished from six to 5 to 4, some offices three. And a lot of the expectations that were that our community has, based on previous experience in terms of civic engagement parades and our community involvement in community groups, in nonprofits, we've had to pass that off to the private sector. This is a direct. We cut our budgets, but we didn't live, lift our raise our ability to raise those private dollars. So I think that this is appropriate. Now, that said, I do have a few questions for the city attorney. Just what I know that we're raising the limits today, but is it appropriate for us to talk about raising contribution limits is going to be more difficult to raise the higher number with the same low contribution level. That isn't currently been discussed yet, but it would be. Appropriate. The agenda item. Contemplates looking at that entire section. Which does include the contribution limit, which I believe is currently $500 per calendar year. And it's 500 for City Council and mayor. I believe that is correct. Okay. That said, I would want to offer a friendly that. So it's 500 for both, right? Well, currently it's a 500 and then I believe 754 for City, which I don't. Think is 750. I think I think for Mr. Mays cricket from for for officeholder. I think the seven fifties is certainly for a campaign cycle. It may be 500 officeholder for everyone. Um, I'm not. I don't believe, I don't have a. It's, it's five or 750. It's one of the two. Yeah, I believe it's five. Um, based on the research I follow what the commission, what the committee did. My understanding is that it's 500 across the board. I'd like to offer a friendly to the maker of the motion to change the contribution limits for council members from 500 to 750 and change for citywide. So mayor, city attorney, so on and so forth from 500 to 1000. And then I. Last time this came to the council, I expressed I think if limits are going to raise, they should be the ratio should maintain be consistent. So if we're going to triple citywide elected officials limit, we should triple the city council limit as well. So that would take us to 30,000. So would you be agreeable to those friendlies? Sure, I'd be agreeable to that. Great. Thank you. Okay. So just to repeat the motion on the floor is to raise officeholder limits to for council 2000 for city wide to 75,000 and to raise the level of contribution for council to 750 and for city wide to 1000. That's the motion on the floor. Councilmember Andrews. To me. Thank you, Mayor. What I'd really like to see at this point, I'd really like to thank Counsel Gonzales and the Elected Oversight Committee, you know, for the work that they put into this item. And I, like I said, I see it every day, especially with the district my size and what I'm dealing with every day . And it's really been an asset to us. But I think this is a great, great item that you brought to the floor. And and I think this will, you know, definitely be good for all of us and the changes you plan on putting together. So I want to thank you for that. Thank you. Vice Mayor Lowenthal. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I wanted to thank Councilmember Price for the questions that she had asked. And I think at times we forget that we have so many new council members, and these are not all issues that they've necessarily been following. There was a time not to suggest that we should go back to this time, but council members had a discretionary fund that was allocated to them. I think several of us remember this. This was Mr. Mayor's laughing. It was $100,000, I believe, if I'm not mistaken. And that was utilized to support organizations, nonprofits, schools, very good causes. And given our budget crisis, that just was not possible anymore. And so what we did is we looked to our officeholder accounts to. Compensate for the loss in that in that amount. But there was no compensation. It was not one for one what we were able to do with $100,000 a year. We now try to do with 1/10 of that, and it wasn't a 10,000 all the time. That was just a recent change as well, and I hope no council member feels pressured to fundraise. I think what this also allows is for those of us who don't have the personal financial means to send ourselves to various events, and I think of the key events which are rightfully fundraisers on their own. Sometimes we get. Com tickets, but really our staff should be there. Our staff is the one that does all the work. And so to send three staff members can cost up to $750 to do so. And these are the things that we use our officeholder accounts for is one to support these nonprofits also the schools. A lot of our schools in our neighborhood, some of our neighborhoods don't have the strong PTA fundraising capacity that some of the other schools do. And that's just a fact of life. And so a lot of us try to make up for that difference, make up for that fundraising difference in the small amounts we're able to contribute through our office holder account. So I cherish this. I don't look at it as a campaign expense. I don't look at it as a way to campaign. But really, for those of you who are out there working hard in your communities to be able to do so by recognizing the neighborhood leaders and their efforts. And so it's not that different from schools that have PTA that have strong fundraising arms. It is really to supplement what the school district is able to do. I view it in the same way, and I thank Councilmember Price for her questions. They they do raise some issues. We don't want the focus to shift, but the focus won't shift. I know each individual on this council and I'm very clear about what each of your focus is, and it really is in your public service. But you also acknowledge that you want to recognize the stakeholders and partners that are working with you and support them in their efforts. So for that, I'm thankful to you, Councilmember Gonzalez, for the hard work. Your committee and I support this motion, including the friendly amendment. Thank you. Thank you. Concern, Austin. Well, a council member or Vice Mayor Lowenthal, you said, took just about every word out of my mouth here. I read your mind. I believe if handled responsibly, these officeholder accounts allow us as council members to have a greater opportunity to serve our communities. It's no secret this isn't done in the dark, that the contributions that we would receive for these officeholders account are part of a very transparent process, that it's open, it's full disclosure to the public. It's our option to raise money or not raise money for this for or for these for officeholder accounts are currently raise money for my officeholder account once a year, and I forget about it after that. And whatever we do, we're able to serve to serve our community better with an optional pot of money to work with. I can assure you, Councilmember Price, and I can assure the entire city as a lobbyist, my focus will not change. Whether or not this passes are not going to be focused on doing a good work in my district and for the city of Long Beach. I think it's very important for us to realize and recognize that Long Beach is a big city, too. It's full of great neighborhoods. It's full of a lot of different issues. We have a lot of different community organizations and they are constantly making request of us as kids city council members to help. Can you help us fundraise? Can you help buy a ticket to our fundraiser? Can you sponsor a few children to go to camp? And we do that a lot, oftentimes out of our own pockets or with the limited resources that we are allowed to raise outside of our city budgets. And so raising these these this limit actually what I think what will help us in our ability to serve our communities, and I will support this along with the friendly amendment as well. And I want to thank the Elections Committee for for doing this great work. Thank you very much. Thank you, Councilman Gonzales. Well, I just want to say thank you collectively to each of you for your thoughtful comments. I know that this wasn't definitely not a fleeting thought for us. This was a really mindful decision. We wanted to make sure that we were invested in in our communities. And I think fundraising is a vital component to what we do. I mean, like Councilmember Austin said, it's not something that we take very lightly. It's it's certainly a very vital component, especially with the city of our size. And so many of us do give back and will continue to give back, and we do so through these officeholder accounts. And so thank you for the friendly amendment, and I'd like to go forward and vote. Okay. And finally, we have Councilwoman Price. I'm gonna go to a vote. I want to thank my colleagues, too, for their informative comments. I do want to I want to especially thank Councilman Richardson, because you do point out something that's first of all, thank you for your very respectful response, because I think we should have a body where we can express concerns. And just to be clear, I didn't criticize anyone. Councilmember Muranga said that with respect to my criticism, I wasn't criticizing anyone or any philosophy. I was just asking questions and raising some concerns. I have no doubt that everybody on this present body is always going to do the right thing. No issues whatsoever. My concern is we set policy moving forward and the decisions we make today stay with this body. Long after that, we are gone. So. Understanding that different districts have different needs and different concerns. I appreciate the thoughtful comments that were made. I think I've raised my concerns in regards to our focus, and Councilman Durango raised a good point about making sure that this is something that is utilized to help our communities and and not as something that is a special interest focus, that it's it's something that's really to broaden and help our communities in general. And I think I definitely believe that this body is mindful of that and would hope that future bodies would be as well. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. And just to clarify the motion, I clarified the motion, but we're also voting on all of 23, just as a reminder. And so it's it's there on your on your screen. We all have that. So, members, please go ahead and cast your votes. Motion carries eight zero. Okay. That was a quick a quick screen. Okay. Thank you for that. Next item is 24.

Recommendation to conduct a study session to receive and discuss the City’s capital investment needs for transportation infrastructure and City facilities. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_12152015_15-1295

I'm here thinking we're going to hear the the pre-bid item first, as requested by Councilman Richardson. The one thing we're going to do without objection, unless there's any objection, is the infrastructure study session is actually important and it's 10 p.m. and there's actually a real presentation attached to it. And I think most folks I'm hearing on the break are a little fried there. So we're going to move that presentation to next week. We have a very short council meeting next week. It'll still be very short council meeting and that will be on on the 22nd next week. So without objection, we're going to move the infrastructure needs assessment to the 22nd. With that, I want to go ahead and Madam. Clerk and Mr. Mayor, if we can make a motion at the appropriate time in a motion to continue that, yeah. I'm going to I'm going to call the can get got a motion. I got a motion in a second. Any public comment on the item. Let me now and please cast your vote. Please cast your votes. Councilmember Richardson. As much as I wanted to have that. Motion carries a. Thank you motion carries to. Next. Week. We just voted on the wrong thing. I didn't see who was up there. So I know it was it was it. Was okay because I did it by voice and so we're okay. Mr.. I think. City Attorney. Motion to continue. So we're good. So now we have an item on the item for I believe, which is the recommendation to approve the transfer of that that we're doing.

A bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification for 1974 and 1990 South Huron Street in Overland. Approves a map amendment to rezone property from E-TU-C to E-SU-A (two-unit to single-unit), located at 1974 and 1990 South Huron Street in Council District 7. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 1-4-22.

DenverCityCouncil_02222022_22-0016

Herndon. Ah. Madam President, I. Madam Secretary, closed the voting and announced the results. 13 Eyes. 13 Eyes. Council Bill 20 2-0003 has passed. Thank you, friend. Councilmember Ortega, will you please put Council Bill 20 2-0016 on the floor for final passage? Madam President, I move that council bill 20 2-0016 be ordered to be placed on final consideration and do pass. Thank you. It has been moved and seconded the required public hearing for Council Bill 20 2-0016 is open. May we have a staff report, please? I just want to make a quick clarification. I believe the case number is 2020 100574, 1974, 1990, South Huron Street, if that's what was stated. Sorry. Um. The. Yes. So our bill. The bill number is 20 2-0016. Okay. All right. Thank you. Okay, sir. Okay, planner. Very good to present the case number 2020 100574, 1974, 1990, South Huron Street. And this request is to go from E2 City Subway. So this is in Council District seven in Clarke's district. More specifically, it's in the Overland neighborhood. And this request again, is from if you see it. Yes. This property is 18, just over 18,000 square feet, and there are actually two properties. So each property is just around 9000 square feet and there are one storey single family homes on each zone lot. And the request as a reason to allow up to three single family homes on each zone lot. So the existing zoning is it you see on the subject sites as well as within the surrounding area. There's also zoning of OSA to the west and to the north and there is um, x three to the south. I'd like to point out a couple of differences between the existing zone district and the proposed district. So the existing zone district of E2 C allows the Urban House detached accessory dwelling unit duplex in tandem house building forms, and those are allowed on a minimum zone lot size of 5500 square feet. The proposed zone district of East A allows the Urban House building form and is allowed on a minimum zone. Lot size of 3000 square feet. So just to break it down, each property has just over 9000 square feet. So if there was potentially a zone law amendment, there could be three single family homes on each zone, not allowing up to six units total for both properties. One thing I'd like to point out between the existing and proposed zone district is to propose a scenario of what would be allowed if you had two units. So with the proposed zone district, if there were two urban houses, that would be allowed on a minimum size of 6000 square feet. So one house on a 3000 square foot lot with the existing zoned district, there is one duplex that can be allowed, which is also two units, and that's allowed on 3500 square feet. So what I want to call out is that this proposed district would allow a similar density that was already allowed today, but just in a slightly different way. So the existing land use on the subject site is single unit residential and there is predominantly small unit residential in the surrounding area as well as to unit and multi-unit residential with the park and open space against the north and west as well as industrial to the south. These are some images of the building forms on the properties today. So it is a one storey single family home on each zone lot and these are some images of the surrounding properties. So again, one story homes, single family homes on each side that's kind of surrounding the area. So we're at the city council public hearing tonight. And I just want to point out that a planning board, public hearing, the planning board voted 8 to 1 to recommend that city council approve the application. I'd like to call out some of the public comment those received. The public comment was received in the staff report, and that includes everything. So I'm just going to give a very quick summary of what was compiled within the public comment letters. So the Overland Park Neighborhood Association submitted a letter of support, claiming that they would like to see three single family detached homes on the sites. And the neighbors of Overland North submitted a letter of opposition. In addition to that, there were 45 letters of opposition. A decent amount of them could be considered form letters and maybe a template. And then a lot of these, in summary, stated a concern of increased density, a concern of potential traffic and parking, and a concern of affordability of maybe the subject sites as well as potential increase in property taxes. There were ten letters of support received and they stated a desire for single family homes and that those single family homes would keep in character with the existing neighborhood. In addition to that, they stated the desire for the moderate increase in density and felt that that was appropriate for the neighborhood. And lastly, there was one letter not necessarily opposing the rezoning, but opposing the development of three units on each side. So I'll move on to the review criteria and how this rezoning case is consistent with it. So starting with the consistency with adopted plans, there are four plans that apply to the subject site. All of that is detailed in the staff report. So I'm going to skip over the comprehensive plan and start with the consistency with the blueprint. Denver Blueprint. Denver identifies future contexts, and the future context for these sites is urban edge, urban as is described as residential areas that are generally single and to users with some low scale and multi unit embedded throughout. So this rezoning request is consistent with the urban edge neighborhood context blueprint. Denver also identifies the future place types, and the place type for here is residential low and it's also described as predominately single and two unit uses on small or medium lots. So this rezoning request is consistent with this plan. Recommendation again blueprint. Denver identifies the growth area strategy and these sites have all other areas of the city applied to it, which essentially means that it's anticipated to see about 20% of new housing growth, as well as 10% of new employment employment growth by 2040. I want to talk a little bit about some of this additional guidance that's outlined in Blueprint Denver. So it has additional guidance for the residential low place type. So this guidance is for if a rezoning request comes in to allow smaller zone lot sizes. And if that comes in, the appropriateness of the rezoning request depends upon the existing character and neighborhood plan guidance. So this request is consistent with that. However, there is additional language that applies to the site, and it states that if there is an applicant driven rezoning request that is an individual site or an assemblage of sites, that and if this request is potentially a departure from the established zone lot pattern, then the request may be appropriate if the intent is to set a new pattern for the area as expressed by an adopted smarter plan. So I'll talk a little bit more about the evaluation of the second bullet points. I'll point you to the map that's on the left and talk you through about how we evaluate kind of the patterns for zone lots. So the subject properties are outlined in the lime green and they have the red color applied to it. So anything in red means that it is a size of 7000 square feet or larger. So the zone lot size is seven square feet larger. When we look to see if there's a pattern for the requested zones, the pattern would be to look to see if there's the darker blue zone lots. Those zone lots are 4500 square feet or less. So again, the requested zone district allows a minimum zone that size of 3000 square feet. So we look to see if there's a pattern of the blue and if the blue has the same use. So everything shown on the map has the same use of the proposed zone district, which is a single unit. As you can see, there's not necessarily a pattern of those so lot sizes. So then the evaluation looks to kind of the second half of the language saying is there additional guidance from adopted small area plans that support this and support the recommendation from Blueprint Denver? And there is additional guidance that do make this recommendation consistent with this plan, which I'll talk about next. So there's a seven station area plan. It identifies these subject sites as the land use of single family duplex. And there's a detailed description of what that means. It's on the PowerPoint right now. I'm not going to read all of it, but I'll summarize it on this slide. So for this land use, it recommends to allow a mixture of housing types to encourage new development consistent with existing conditions. And the plan describes the existing conditions as small, single family lots around 4500 square feet with moderate lot coverage and shallow to moderate setbacks. In addition to that, the plan recommends densities that should be between ten and 20 housing units per acre area wide. So looking at this plan, I'll talk through how this rezoning request is consistent with these recommendations. So the request is consistent with the predominant single unit character of the neighborhood. And it also allows additional units. It allows for a density of housing units that is consistent with the typical density that's outlined, which is 10 to 20 units per acre, and falls about halfway in between that recommended density. It also encourages the potential reinvestment in the neighborhood and provides an additional mixture of housing types of urban houses on smaller lots. And then lastly, the smaller lot size of the requested zone district would allow for a similar number of units as a two unit district. But again, in just a different way, the Overland Neighborhood Plan also applies to the site. It's a little bit older plan, but even still the request is consistent with its guidance. This plan identifies these properties as being in the residential subgroup A and it describes this subgroup as being considered a single family enclave. And it also has an additional recommendation to develop the remaining land in a manner that is compatible with the land use character and density of surrounding land use and the existing zoning. So the request of single unit would be with would be consistent with the neighborhood character that's there today as well as the land use. So that is a review of the consistency with the plans. The proposed zoning will also result in uniform application of zone, district building form use and the design regulations. So it meets criteria number two and it also furthers the public health, safety and welfare because it's consistent with Blueprint Denver's policies. And it also encourages compatible compatible infill as well as potential for new housing. For the fourth criteria justifying circumstances there. There is a change to such a degree that the proposed reasoning is in the public interest. So first, looking at city adopted plans as a justifying circumstance, there are plans that provide clear guidance and strategies and they also identify the need for a variety of housing types that are consistent with the existing neighborhood character. In addition to that, there are teams are changing conditions found in the neighborhood that can be used as a justifying circumstance. Blueprint Denver identifies the West Evans Avenue as a future place type of community corridor and the area adjacent to the Evans station as community center. And those areas along the corridor as well as near the station have seen some change over time and some growth over time as well. In addition to that, there has been city investments, city investments to a nearby park, and there is also a planned pedestrian bridge just northeast of this neighborhood. It's called the Jewel Evans Station Bicycle and Pedestrian Bridge. And it was part of the 2017 Elevate Denver Bond. So it's received initial funding and it's also had an RFQ out for initial design services. So the rezoning request was also found consistent with the neighborhood context zone, district purpose and intent. So finally, based on the criteria for review and the Denver Zoning Code staff recommends approval for application 2020 1i00057. Thank you. I'll be here for questions. All right. Thank you, Sarah, for the staff report. We have 20 individuals signed up to speak this evening. Our first speaker is in person, Neil Shay. Please introduce yourself for the public record. Neil Shay 1625 South Lincoln Street. Like to thank council for having me tonight. Thank you, sir, for your presentation. So really what we're looking at here with this rezoning is a down zoning to a more attainable building form and one that's more in line with the character of the neighborhood. What could be built here under the current zoning is a massive duplex, one that's two and a half stories tall wedding cake style, 55 feet wide and up to 35, finished square feet above grade and would sell well into the $900,000. What we're proposing under this new zoning is actually three smaller single family homes that would be built on 3000 square foot lots. We can build them three beds, two and a half baths and aim to deliver these in the mid six hundreds to low seven hundreds. Each home would still be two and a half stories tall, but just under 19 feet wide. And all four two car garage. I do want to highlight the fact. Pull your mike down a little bit. We. You better. Thank you. I do want to highlight the fact that starting in the fall of 2019, we started our community outreach. We met with both neighborhood organizations, and we also met with individual residents one on one. During those meetings, we gained a lot of feedback. The feedback, as Sarah mentioned earlier, had to do with everything from affordability, higher property taxes, traffic. Neighborhood character. And the assurance that we would actually build what we said we're going to build. And we're aiming to address all those issues in this rezoning. We continue to meet with residents in the Oberlin neighborhood, and at our sixth meeting with the Overland Park Neighborhood Association, we did get that letter of support from that R.A.. Post resume. We continue to plan on meeting with these Hornets and individuals to get their feedback on what the actual design of these units will look like. Finally in closing, I just want to mention that most everybody knows that development in this neighborhood is inevitable. It's already happening. But we can do it in a more responsible manner. Our proposed rezoning is aligned with the city's planning documents, which call for greater diversity of residential dwelling units in an area in and around neighborhoods with greater access to transit. This proposal also seeks to minimize displacement by providing more attainable units that are significantly more in line with the existing neighborhood character. And finally, I'd just like to say, as was mentioned earlier, we are in a housing crisis. I'm also a licensed realtor. Before I came down here today, I checked the MLS to see how many available units were active online. There were 314 in all the county of Denver. All we're asking for is one additional unit that would currently be allowed by the current zoning, as Councilman Hines mentioned earlier. A gentle density might be appropriate. I think that word speaks well here. Thanks. Would also be more taking. The time we have allotted speaker. Thank you. Thank you. We're going to go ahead and move on line. And our first speaker joining us via Zoom is Weston Snyder. Go ahead, please. Weston. You're going to have to unmute yourself. It looks like you're unmuted. We have westerns, audio. Listen, we have you unmuted. Okay. Well, China is Western speaking or. Okay. We'll go ahead and try to come back to Weston if there's some problem. We'll go next to Beverly Bravo. Hi. My name is Beverly Bravo, and I live in Denver, Colorado. I own a property in Overland Park and. I support the application because I think that it is going to be a good, soft manner of providing more density in a transportation corridor and. It will be nicer than those duplexes that are going up. Sorry, I can't seem to get my video right. They're going to be smaller. You know, single family. And hopefully they'll be more affordable for and support home ownership. And like Neil said, the. The. Development seems to be inevitable. And it but it could be done it could be done in a nicer fashion than those huge kind of somewhat ugly duplexes that have been populating the whole area. So, again, I own a house in Overland and I do support the application for this zoning. And that's all. All right. Thank you. We're going to try to go back to Weston Snyder. Was going to ask me about. Western it showing that you're unmuted. Okay. Is that better? Yes. Go ahead. Okay. Perfect. My name is Weston Snyder and I own 1904 South Huron Street with my wife, Cleo Castelluccio. And we oppose the zoning change. I lived in a neighborhood prior that had some of the units that Neil Sheehan was using in one of his presentations. I was at 1240 South Pennsylvania Street, and the units in question were 1291 through 1295, and that neighborhood specifically was already shotgun lots. And that kind of fit with the esthetic of the neighborhood. In this situation, it's larger single family homes and duplexes, not three shotgun lots with single family homes on them. And. In my experience, we had a lot of parking issues in that neighborhood, and I think that had a lot to do with just the density of the housing, and that's going to become an issue here. We actually had to move to street permits for parking in that area. And another thing I've noticed is that our current zoning, we haven't even begin to touch what's available there as far as growth. So I don't see the need to move to a further dense plan than what we're already using. That's all I have. Our next speaker this evening is Mara SHAPIRO. Can you hear me? Yes. Hello? Can you hear me? Yes. My name is. My name is Mary Schapiro. I live at 1977, South Huron, and they lived at this address for more than 40 years. So I'm very vested in the neighborhood. I would like to speak against the proposal to rezone the property in 1974, in 1990, South Huron. This proposal was originally presented in 2019, but with was but was withdrawn shortly afterwards because at that time the city's community planning office indicated they probably would not be able to support it, since it was inconsistent with Blueprint Denver plans. The idea behind Blueprint Denver is that if changes are to be made to the zoning, it should not be for just one or two specific addresses, but only if there is an established pattern in the surrounding blocks. There is not an established pattern for smaller lots in Oberlin North. The character and pattern of lot sizes in Oberlin North is larger lots. I would like to present a fact based reason not to accept the zoning change. We live in a floodplain. I was on the Colorado Demat team for over ten years. Demat is the Disaster Medical Assistance Team. I was deployed to Texas for Hurricane Harvey in 2017. It was determined that a major reason for the flooding and damage that happened in Houston from Hurricane Harvey was because Houston has been so built up with buildings and cement. There is no place for the water to go. Overland Park hasn't flooded since 1965 and that is why Chatfield Dam was built. But we still are in the flood plain from Harvard Gulch. We continue to pay for flood insurance only once since I have lived here. Has the river swelled. And when that happened, the water almost reached the bike path and passed Grinnell's landing. Why do we want to repeat the same mistake made in Houston in our neighborhood by increasing the buildings and cement and Mother Nature to cause flooding here. The comment could be made, but we're only changing the lot. Size of two lots. That won't really affect anything. The problem with that comment is that once the zoning is changed at one address, it will set a precedent. And when the next developer wants to change the zoning and another address, that developer would be able to say, You've already changed it once. Why can't we do it again? It won't have much of an impact. The Denver Post analysis in 2018 found that green space in Denver is disappearing faster than in most other cities, with paved over coverage increasing from 19% of the city in 1974 to 48% in 2018. This deviates greatly from Denver's heritage of over a century ago of being a city within a park. We've all heard the old fable about the boiling frog in the story. A frog is placed in a large pot filled with cold water, is very content with not a care were a care in the world. Then someone comes by and fires up the burner. The water in the pot slowly begins to get warmer and warmer. But the frog is not concerned. As he finds the warmth refreshing, the heat keeps gradually rising until the frog has become so high that. A lot of groups don't go ahead and move on to our next speaker. Mara Owen. I was cut off. Hello. My name is my own. Can you hear me? Mara, we've got to get you unmuted in chambers. Go ahead, please. Hello. You can hear me now? Yes. Wonderful. Hello. My name is Mara Owen. I live in Denver on the 2200 block of South Acoma. And I'm the current president of the Overland Park Neighborhood Association. I'd like to give some additional context around the open letter of support for this rezoning. Neil Shay with Vision Acquisitions first attending our monthly meeting in July of 2019. We requested at that time that he return to another meeting to allow neighbors advance notice for the talk. But the topic would be discussed and for us to send out notes for his presentation so anyone interested could attend. As we do with all of our meetings, we emailed out a detailed met list for anyone who missed the meeting who could find out what would happen. Neal presented again at the September 2019 monthly meeting and requested a letter of support. All 20 members of our organization present at that meeting voted unanimously in support of the rezoning, which at that time was proposed from Etsy to YouTube, with the caveat that we required a good neighbor agreement to ensure the plans presented for three smaller square footage homes would be followed through on knowing that the designation still allowed for the duplex building form at this September 2019 meeting. We also informed Neil that he should reach out to Nunes, since he had not yet done so, which he did thereafter. Shortly in October of 2019, Neil presented to open a another three times monthly meetings in August of 2020, October 2020, and most recently in January 2022 at the October 2020 monthly meeting. Neil informed us of the rezoning had changed from requesting to be to ESU, which would remove the need for a good neighbor agreement to enforce the building form that would actually be constructed as three smaller square footage homes versus duplex. Another discussion was and a vote was taken for the new request and again passed unanimously with 15 members in attendance. As a side note, our organization does not submit letters of support or opposition if there's no consensus at the meetings. At all meetings. Healthy conversation around the proposal occurred prior to any vote, and the following main points were discussed multiple times when deciding to vote in favor. Smaller lots allow for more units overall and support smaller footprint homes which, even if they have the same price per square foot as a larger home, can be more affordable simply because of the reduced square footage, regardless of the eventual architecture. This is especially important since affordability is relative and even prices for existing homes in our neighborhood are well above what most current owners would consider accessible. It fit in to neighbors ideas of our community as a more inclusive and accessible place to live. It also reflected the need to provide more housing in general, and the trend of smaller, new dealer families, instead of providing larger square footage is simply a different way to provide the same number of bedrooms. But more housing options equals more flexibility in the idea of the electric nature of our neighborhood comes from diversity in both people and housing stock, and we are proud to have Victorian style homes situated right next to mid-century modern homes, row homes and duplexes all in the same neighborhood. And this would further added diversity of housing options. If anyone would like more information on the Overland Park Neighborhood Association to read our meeting minutes or we'd like to sign up for our newsletter to stay up to date, please visit. Denver Got word? Anyone and everyone are welcome to attend meetings. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Our next speaker is Sean Mulcahy. Right. Do we have Shaun moved into the queue? This is Sean. Go ahead, please. Yes, sir. My name is Sean Mulcahy. I live at 1993, South Huron, and I've owned this. I've lived at this property for 16 years. I love the neighborhood. I. I oppose. I oppose the proposition. I believe that there's enough density here. I'm worried about. Traffic. And that's pretty much what I have. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Sean. Our next speaker joining us online is Terry Pasqua. Okay. Terry, we have you in the queue. You're going to have to unmute. Okay. Go ahead, please. Hi. Thank you, Madam President, and members of City Council. My name is Terry Pascale, and I'm here with my husband, Paul. The Door. We live at six or six Westall Avenue, three blocks from the subject property. And this is our joint statement. Homeowners in the hood for 14 years and active members of the Overland Park Neighborhood Association. Not for ten years. We are for the rezoning in order to promote more discussion of affordable single family homes, four wells with no shared walls, which allows for windows and light on all sides. We would also like to state the obvious process for voting in support of this stunning change was fair, equitable and consistent with its well established and communicated practices. As its former. Secretary, I can. Attest office meeting agendas are mailed out in advance to several hundred neighbors and detailed minutes from each monthly meeting are also sent out to the same list. Notices are posted on Facebook and the minutes are also posted on our website at the Denver dot org. Those of us who are actively involved with Ana wish that a lot more neighbors would pay attention to such zoning requests, participate in our meetings, become voting members, and to share their opinions when it's most timely and most effective. One comment we've heard from neighbors is their concern of increased density. As far as we know, every new development that has taken place during the past few years has already added to an increase in density. But where we're located next to South Platte River and with the largest open green space in Denver right outside our doors, a little added density in the hood does not affect the overall living experience. And regarding affordability, this rezoning, by the time these small single family homes are built, we can assume a price around 600,000 based on the recent shared will townhomes on the same block, Zillow estimates around 800,000. Still, we expect the new homes to be offered about 200, 250,000 or more below the large duplexes. That would not require any rezoning. As such, affordability is relative and it's not in our control. By not approving this change, the developer will be able to move forward and build a duplex up to 55 feet wide. And if our neighbors are okay with building bigger and more expansive duplexes as tradeoffs for less density than we can understand, but we respectfully disagree by approving this change, it would it would allow for detached single family homes on smaller lots, which would add more variety of choices and more affordability. In fact, we feel that this and also the YouTube rezoning of our some of our large lots would best serve our greater Denver community needs and is in accordance with Blueprint Denver. If you want to support smaller, more affordable and available single family homes, we strongly request that you support this proposal. Thank you for the opportunity to express our views and this joint statement. Thank you. Our next speaker is Sheryl Peterson. Going, General, good eating mothers, president and city council members. I am a homeowner homeowner on South U.S. Street, which is the same block where the developer wants to rezone the too much to increase the density. They are strongly against the city council voting tonight to allow. I see a dangerous precedent set in a neighborhood where city planners previously determined that the large flats in our small 20 block enclave of Overland Park could take up to two dwelling units for side. I have three areas conserved in our neighborhood. The increase of density allows for more cars. More parking concerns. Currently, the zoning allows for the existing single family. Large blocks be redeveloped into two dwelling units. The proposal in front of me tonight is to build three dwelling units, which would increase the density for those two blocks from the existing to the proposed by 300% and increase from the existing two. The current zoning in place by 150%. That's a lot. We live right up against the Platte River. This area is in the floodplain and residents are required to carry flood insurance. More density beyond what is allowed would increase the extreme stress on flooding issues. The precedent would it would set would create others to try to rezone the remaining large swaths 45 feet of water, which would attack the systems in the neighborhood even more. If rezoning is a consideration with the planning department, why are they doing a study to determine if this is appropriate and come up with a plan to present it to the complete neighborhood, including our small area of Overland Park? I've always thought that the city planners have made sound decisions to protect the fabric of the neighborhoods and not make decisions that favor one person over the homeowners. I'm a bit surprised that it has gone through our current system this far. I'm confused by the rezoning. Of the Planning Commission. To support this and to put it in front of the City Council. Please vote against the rezoning proposal and direct the developer to work within the current zoning. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Jack Ron. Am I on, as we say? Yes. Okay. Madam President. And members of. Council, this is a regular sort of question for council. With tremendous demand for housing at generally unaffordable prices and supply side interest in this market opportunity. You're going to find neighbors for and against, depending on what they think the impact will be for them, since the knowledgeable members of the Zoning Commission overwhelmingly recommended in favor of the change. Before you hear, I assume that the general new urban view of how the proposal and the neighborhood match from a planning perspective was behind their informed decision. The quasi judicial responsibility. Before you again is, I hope, uncomplicated on its merits. I speak for the zoning change because the proposed use agrees with the historic building. Forms in the neighborhood I've lived. In for the past 40 plus years. Single family homes on single lots. It was the need for greater density, which this zoning recommendation would accomplish to accommodate demand and limit sprawl. That. Caused the longstanding R one zoning, which this, until the recent zoned form based zoning, came on line to be changed to two units per lot at these addresses, and also supportive of the two independent developers who partnered to develop these properties they currently own and opted to build six homes that by definition more closely matched the immediately surrounding properties rather than the two duplexes addressable under the current zoning. They have reached out to all applicable R.A. and have received the endorsement of the Overland Park Neighborhood Association, largely by appealing to new urban design practices and making American Dream home and property ownership as affordable as possible. With modest. Dwellings on discrete properties. Six Home owning families are a positive addition. To our neighborhood in terms of the. Architectural similarity. The zoning would now require the the powerful stabilizing stakes that these neighbors would have in the health of their area, as expressed by the large participation of people testifying this evening and entry price. Points that. Mitigate the alienation of gentrification. Please support the request to change our neighborhood associations will certainly invite them to become activists in one. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Frank Peterson. And Frank, we have you joining via phone, I believe so. You'll have to. Ask us. To unmute. Go ahead. Okay. Thank you, Madam President and Council. Appreciate the opportunity to to at least share my voice. My name is Frank Peterson. I reside at 1900 South Shore on. And I'm vehemently opposed to changing the rezoning to allow three individual homes on one lot in our neighborhood. This would. Create six homes where there are currently. Two. That's a you know, if I do the math, it's a 200% increase in the number of buildings and the number of people that will be residing in those buildings. This is not good for our community in overland and in our direct area. It is only good for the developer. No one knows what's going to be built and what it's going to look like. So that's kind of hard to to say that and be realistic. Creating this additional density to our block would create over the top parking issues a crowded. Street where there are currently. Drive thru traffic issues as it is scheduled to run here on is a cut through for many. This sets a very bad precedent to flood our neighborhood with additional buildings. These are not affordable housing. As the developer said, they're going to be 600 to $750000. So that's really not, in my mind an argument. And the floodplain issue is huge. Thank you very much. That's all I've got. Thank you. Our next speaker is Pete Helfer. Okay. Pete, you're going to have to mute, please. There we go. Yeah. I would like to speak in support of the rezoning application. I own a property a few blocks south on Gallup. They go up and down there. I and I sent a letter to you all down there in that block, in particular, those couple of blocks south of Evans. We've really seen a lot of these scrapes and rebuilds of these of these big duplexes. And, you know, I think that would probably be the standard development tactic for for these larger lots, you know, if they aren't allowed to be, as Mr. Shays sat down, zoned into smaller parcels for some smaller homes and increased for them, you know, to live in units to three, you know, was not that great. And, you know, the city is facing affordable housing crisis. As I said in my letter, I don't think anything new construction is going to be, you know, truly affordable without some kind of subsidy. But this is going to be at the lower end of the market. And my experience with Mr. Dickson is that he's going to make them zero net energy to and, you know, infill density is is kind of on a par with energy efficiency in the structure itself. It's sort of they go together. Otherwise, you know, the option becomes sprawl. You know, one more household has to go out to Douglas County or up to Morrisville or something. Sorry, you know, Erie. So, so I'm in support of this. It's not that great of an increase. And the proposal I saw did have garages planned so they'd be, you know, at least provided some of their own parking. And, you know, and I also like to point out the you know, the city has ambitious climate action goals that are getting adopted and the new green building code that's being adopted, plus all the discussion about looking at Adus citywide. You know, all of these are are you know, you're not going to go buy a 7000 foot house bill or ward and build, you know, one little house on that. The only way to do it is to have, you know, rezoning slightly smaller land to make it where the math even seems close to working out. So that's all. And thank you for letting me call him from my warm living room. Thank you. Our next speaker is Helene or. Go ahead, please. Okay. Hello. Thank you. Members of city council are coming out, being here on this bitter cold night. My name is Helene or I live at Fox and Jewel in the Oberlin North neighborhood. I've lived here for 40 years and loved every minute of it. I oppose the zoning change, and on behalf of the neighbors of Overland North as their president, I would like to mention that we also voted to oppose the change. I have yet to hear a truly compelling argument for the zoning change. Our existing zoning need to see permits two units, either a large duplex or two single family homes currently. That is, in our view, plenty of density that we are absorbing right now in the neighborhood without raising it by a third to three houses and. Increasing density people talk about quite a bit as though it's intrinsically a good thing. I don't agree with that. I think increasing density without true affordability and forgive me. 600,000. 700,000. 800,000. 900,000. Or not in any way affordable. And I'm thinking of all the people who cannot afford to buy a home or even afford the rent in a home on a bitter night like tonight. So this is not really helping the housing crisis, in my view. In Denver. And there are no provisions for affordability in this zoning rezoning and there is no plan. So to me, from where I stand at the heart of my neighborhood that I love, what I see is an attempt to just do zoning by patchwork and haphazard. Here. They're here. They're here. They're and at best, that's what it is. And at worst, I feel like it's trying to change the entire zoning for our neighborhood and sneaking it through the back door. Blueprint Denver is very clear and I'm going to read from the same passage to Sara read from earlier. It's a departure from the established pattern may be appropriate if the request includes a larger area, generally greater than one block, and the intent is to set a new pattern for the area as expressed by an adopted small area plan or significant. If neighborhood input neither of which we have and also. The original planner who looked at this application said it was not consistent with adopted plans or blueprint for Denver, and so that there would need to include almost the entire area, have community meetings where neighbors are in agreement. About changing the zone. We have no agreement. Okay. No. As for the zoning, noone is against the zoning. We have no agreement. We have no plan. This is not how to do zoning. We need a plan and we would be happy to work with anyone to provide a plan for you. That's the time we have allotted for each speaker. Our next speaker is Robert Lovell. Robert Greenwood, go ahead, please. Robert Lavelle. Hi. And hello. And thank you to all the members of City Council. My name is Robert Lavelle, and I'm in favor of this proposal. My wife and I have lived in our home at 46 West Jill Avenue since 2012. We've benefited from the investments that the city developers and individuals have made in our surrounding community. We love the variety and unique character that our neighborhood contains. In addition to a diverse housing stock, our neighborhood consists of local businesses along Evans and South Broadway amenities such as the Overland Park Golf Course, the South Platte River Trail, and the RTD Light Rail at Evans Station. My wife is the former president or co-president of Optum and myself are both in favor of this rezoning request. The developer has been thorough with the community outreach. He has the support of the Over the Park Neighborhood Association. He's met with us over six times, I think, over the past three years. I drive by the required rezoning request and just as every day he's been accessible by phone and email and willing to discuss the rezoning request with me. I feel that this is a thoughtful approach to development and one which respects the existing character of the neighborhood, which does have small homes, medium sized homes, does have large duplexes. It's a mixture. And it also would increase the density in this area, which is something that the city needs, but that this area can support with the bike path and the RTD nearby. It is a transit rich area. And I the new development will encourage smaller residential units which will be significantly more affordable than the larger slightly out of place boxes, the duplexes that have become prevalent in all new construction. I believe that we you know, this should be approved. I'm in favor of it because it will increase the diversity of the housing stock, which will also improve the architectural and socio economic diversity of the neighborhood, resulting in a stronger, more organic neighborhood fabric. As prices in Denver continue to rise. This is the type of thing that is needed. These are creative solutions to incentivize more attainable housing. And I believe that this rezoning request would result in that more single family homes in the neighborhood at a more affordable price. And for those reasons, I'm in favor of this proposal. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Simon Fellows. There we go. This is Simon, fellows. I'm a 1967 South Huron Street. I live opposite proposed rezoning. Um, we've had a great opportunity to listen and meet with both the neighborhood associations and the developer prior to the meeting. There's been a lot of healthy debate around it. There were two concerns that we have. One is firstly that we've been offered, but it seems to me by the developer as a stark choice between very ugly, giant duplexes or these very charming little tiny houses that are going to sit on 3000 square foot lots. Um, we don't have any say in what they're actually going to end up putting up there. But, um, you know, it does seem a little bit biased in the way that presenting. I very much doubt that the choice is between a big, ugly duplex and three beautiful detached homes. Either way, we know the development's going to happen, and we really hope that we can rely on the integrity of the developers in whichever solution is permitted. But we are opposed to three. We think that two is better, and the issue for that for us is really density on that street. Um, directly opposite, opposite us. In the last 12 to 18 months, we've seen six new dwellings go up. There's a further duplex, two dwellings under construction on the end. So in 1974 and 1990, what you're proposing is a further six new buildings on that same street. The net increase to that st in the period over the last few years basically means 8 to 10 new dwellings on the same side of one single street, practically doubling the number of dwellings there in the blink of an eye. We have we we actually think that that like this this gentle densification is not gentle at all. It's actually pretty abrupt. And the additional units that are going in there is further exacerbating that issue. We also understand and again, the the initial outline given by Sarah, I believe it was, was very technical in how it considered the blueprint for Denver. We don't really kind of understand how it fully fit with the blueprint for Denver and that all changes think the changes to the land use to include three three units per lot has been properly considered. Anyway, um we're very concerned about that would set the for the development of the whole area and that that may not have been considered fully enough. As such, we'd like to just register our opposition to the proposed rezoning and thank you very much for your time. Thank you. Our next speaker is Laurie Paulson. Go ahead, please. Laurie, you're going to have to unmute. Okay. Laurie, you're going to have to unmute. Okay. You're unmuted, Laura. Go ahead, please. Okay. We're not able to hear Laurie. And so. Are you able to hear Laurie in the Zoom platform? Okay. All right. Or have you check your audio, Lori, and see if we can get you back in the queue. Next we have. Bryan Montoya. All right. And it looks like we don't have. Bryan Montoya as an attendee. And so we'll go ahead and move on. Then we have Estancia Montoya. And I know we've got a stent in because we had seen her. You'll have to. Hello? Can you hear me? All right. And actually, I do have three on my way here with me. She could speak after. She can have her time. Something must be going on with your side. But I'm opposed to this zoning change. I think that if this is something that we think needs to be done in that is needed to be more density and more planning for our neighborhoods, then it should go through the proper channels instead of going through a back door, as it's been said before. I know the opener said that they had like 15 to 20 members for this, but let's just look at like 15 to 20 members is about 1 to 2% of what our neighborhood is also nil. The developer said that him and his team, I believe, have been out and about the neighborhood. I've lived in this neighborhood for 40 years. It's a five block radius. We are surrounded by the Platte River, the oldest golf course west of the Mississippi and the Santa Fe Highway. And then. There's only two ways to get into this neighborhood and in or out of this neighborhood. The density that Simon just brought up, especially on Huron Street, is has doubled. And going from right now, Neil can build two houses. So I kind of feel that is he's saying, hey, I can either build these two big houses or let me have these three little ones. If he truly cares about the characteristic and the good of this neighborhood, then he can continue to build the characteristic houses that he wants and build two of them and still, you know, be true to the neighborhood. I've personally walked around this neighborhood recently in the last couple of weeks to speak to our neighborhood to see who's known about this. And it was a surprise to me that so many people did not know about this zone change or had a full good understanding of what was really going on. So I don't really feel that Neil's team has truly gone out and about, decides going to open and maybe noon to let them know. But nobody's come around to any of them. And I spoke to I believe you guys have a probably about I know I seen there was like over 45 letters against this. So I'm just asking that city council, you guys were voted in by the community and the community is reaching out to you, letting you know that this is not a good decision for our neighborhood and that if we want to go down this route, let's go through the proper channels. Let's not go through this backdoor of trying to get this changed for one or two lots. I live this neighborhood and going from, you know, 2 to 3 on one lot is going to just the density is going to be intense there. We already see the density from the new apartments that we've embraced in our neighborhood. In a five blocks neighborhood, we've embraced two apartment complexes. So I'm just asking that city council listen to the community and vote against this rezoning change and allow Neil to continue to build either two small homes or a duplex. All right. Thank you, Estancia, for your comments. And it sounded like Bryan Montoya was with you as well. Yeah. Can I give her the phone? Yes. And if she can, just make sure and introduce herself. For the public record. We appreciate that. Hi. My name is Brianne montoya. I have been a member of both O'Connor and Noone. I am currently a new member and I feel that it is more community based and O'Connor has been more of a high real estate agent, developer, member base. If you notice, the people that support this zone change are not individuals that actively live in the neighborhood but may own a property there. There are many homes that are being built currently. I, you know, I know in Reunion and in Brighton there's homes that are being built for $400 housing, which are more affordable than the ones he's proposing and that that are. It feels very privileged for Neal to not abide by the laws of the land and want special privileges to monopolize on the area which he won't be occupied. I grew up in this neighborhood and watched the traffic has increased, which near a park is a hazard for kids and people walking their dogs. But it's also just like a parking hazard and the fact that this neighborhood is developing. No matter what, we could still control how much it increases over time. And so I just I opposed and this was. I oppose and asked the city council to not support this privileged very. You know, back door type of monopoly. Thank you. Thank you. We're going to go back and see if we can get Laurie Paulson into the queue before we move on to our next few speakers. And Laura, you're going to have to unmute yourself. Okay. Go ahead, Laurie, please. Okay. We're not hearing any audio. And so we've tried a couple of times there. Laurie, I'm sorry about that. We're going to go ahead and move on to Emily Granado. Okay. It doesn't look like we have Emily with us, Cathleen Dugan. Can you hear me okay? We have Kathleen with us. I am Kathleen do again. I live in 1947, so a lot of street and I have been here since 1998. I adamantly opposed the rezoning of this neighborhood of those particular two lots, 1974 and 1990, South Huron. Well, I would love to see affordable housing. I would love that the growth caused by Neil, the developer, is not affordable. And that is the proposed cost, the expected cost. Now, what it will be when the project is absolutely actually finished is a whole different story. In addition to the lack of affordability of housing, the density brings increased traffic. We already have significant traffic issues in this little neighborhood of ours. As Simon mentioned, we have people coming through. We also have golf course traffic. And I don't know about the rest of the neighbors, but there have been multiple times that I have felt like my life has been risk because of people speeding down the road. But the increased people comes the increased traffic turning into the neighborhood is already difficult with the new apartment buildings that we've had. There are so many reasons, in addition to everything else that everybody else has said in opposition to this, I am against it and I would encourage the City Council to vote against the rezoning. Thank you. That's all I have. Thank you. And our last speaker this evening is Laurel Guardado. Go ahead, Laurel. Okay. We're getting more moved over. Do we have? Laurel moved over. Go ahead, Laurel, please. Okay. For whatever reason, we're not able to hear the audio for Laurel. And so you're going to have to unmute. Laurel, please. Hi there. Good evening. Go ahead. Madam President, thank you for your time. I apologize. Okay. I didn't realize I was going to be speaking, and I had sent an email earlier. Yes, I born and raised in Overland North. And I you know, I have witnessed firsthand a. And you know, just how there are more and more people. And I'm just concerned with. The gentrification issues that we have. I know. People won't be able to afford these homes. And that is my main concern this evening. Okay. Thank you, Laurel. That concludes our speakers this evening. Questions from members of Council on Council Bill 20 20016. Councilwoman Black. Thank you, Madam President. And thank you to all the speakers who spoke tonight. I have a few questions probably for Sarah and then also maybe for you, Nate. So this is. Technically a down zoning. And so how often do we have something like this? That's a great question. I think it's hard to say. I don't have a number in my head, but I'll just reiterate that we evaluate rezoning requests as they come in. And with evaluating this one, we look at lots of the small area plan guidance. And even though it may be considered a downsizing per say in terms of single family units, there's still the opportunity for additional units to happen or additional housing to occur in the area. If this is approved tonight and say then the owner changes his mind and wants to do something different or sells it to someone else, could they then reason it back to the original sound district, the ETU? Another great question is that so if someone came in with that proposed rezoning request, I think we would evaluate it as it is, considering that the surrounding zoning is predominantly it's you see that zoned district already? I would I would say that there would be a likelihood that it would meet the criteria. Okay. And so it seems like most of the neighbors who are opposed to it were concerned about the number of units. And when I look at your PowerPoint, you've got I don't know what I did with it. There it is. It the current zoning would allow for duplexes and ADU. Is that correct? Yes. So on each of the existing lots under the current zoned district, could they actually have three units, a duplex plus 182? Yes. So unfortunately with the duplex, adu use aren't allowed to be built. So the maximum amount of numbers that could happen today would be four units would either be a duplex on each side, so two units on each, or it could be a single family home and an Adu. So kind of any combination would still equal a maximum for for today. That would be a ladder. Or a tandem house. Yes. Or tandem house. Okay. And then a lot of the neighbors mentioned a lot of other new development in the neighborhood. The last speaker spoke about spoke about gentrification. Do do we know have any of those been rezonings or people just scraping houses and building larger houses? Do you imagine that? But I would like to say, at least in the neighborhood that we're considering now, pretty much all of that new development has been under existing entitlements, under the existing zone districts of E2. So I think people mentioned a lot of duplexes going up, which is already loud today. Mm hmm. All right. I think that's all I have for now. This is a very interesting proposal. And I will save my comments for later. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Councilmember Black, Councilman Cashman. Yeah, thank you, Madam President. I agree with Councilwoman Black. It's a very interesting rezoning application. So if this passes, is there any additional procedure or process or paperwork needed to divide into the three lots? Yes, there would be a process for that to do us a lot of amendment. But this zoning would require that to be done. Yes. That well, depending on what is planned for the property. So with this rezoning, it would be zoned to ESU a. But the property owner could still build a single family home on the entire lot if they wanted to. So it would allow the single family house. But on the minimums, a lot size. It doesn't have a necessarily like a maximums, a lot size. So they could just not do a lot amendment and do a thing like one single family home or potentially, I think two single family homes. Right. And then they'd be able to again build two homes and two way to use. So the idea is would not be allowed under this. Proposal because of the zoning laws. Yeah, it is the only the urban house building form. But you said they could build two houses. Single family houses. If so, that would involve the same idea of the Zomlot amendment. So I think when we looked at this evaluation that's looking at kind of the full potential of what could occur under the proposed zoning. So I know I talked a lot about, you know, the potential for three units, but that is just the potential of what could happen in terms of maybe the maximum number of units that could occur. So they're not required to divide the lot into three, 3000 square foot units. So they're allowed to. Be allowed to with the smaller lot. Size. Okay. Thank you for that. I hate to put you through this. Could you go to slide 18, please? Don't try this at home, kids. Hmm. This is just the right one. Yes, it is. So the future place says predominantly single in two unit uses on small or medium lots. And when you were talking about this slide, you said it. Gave plan support for three. And I'm just trying to understand that. So under the proposed zone district it still would be single unit uses. So it would still allow the single unit use, so it'd be the single unit use which would allow the single family homes, I guess. Gotcha. Thank you very much. I this is something I doubt you've figured out. I'm wondering, you know, there's a few people talked about concerns over the loss of green space. And I'm just trying to figure what the difference is if someone builds a big duplex on the site or, you know, it's divided into three smaller homes. I didn't personally do an analysis of that, but I know there is a requirement of kind of the zone lot coverage or a maximum coverage that can happen on that. So I would have to say, yeah, but we don't know the square feet of that. Okay. The on the homes that could be built and this may be for Mr. Shay. I'm not sure. I'm just wondering about the size of the homes. Would you be able to go on a 3000 square foot lot? Can you map Max out on the height? The allowable height is a 30 or 35 on on a. It believe, leave us 35 feet or two, two and a half stories for that area. I would have to double check. Do you know if that narrow width allows you to max out that height? Trying to figure out what what type of square foot gets built? That could be a great question. Mr.. Shaking You answer that question, sir. And I'll just reiterate that we don't necessarily evaluate the development itself, just the proposed standards. I understand. He might be able to answer questions. On. Thank you, sir. And sir, before you leave the podium, would you, if you wouldn't mind, introduce yourself for the public record before Mr. Shave, and then he can introduce himself. So I'm sick, of course. Senior city planner with community planning and development. Great. Thank you. Councilman Cashman, could you repeat your question? Yeah. So you talked about if you build the big duplex 55 feet wide, they'd be, I think you said 900,000 apiece, something like that. And I'm wondering what kind of size gets built on a 3000 square foot lot? How big a home you can build on that? Gotcha. Okay. Realistically, it could go 1600, a little over 1700 square feet. It's an interesting question because we've been tracking an initiative that I believe has been discussed recently in this council, and that is the Expanding Housing Affordability Initiative. One of the interesting points of that initiative is there is a linkage being that's going to be potentially charged to developers for these smaller projects. And the interesting thing about it is it specifically mentioned 1600 square feet as a differentiating factor if units that are 1600 square feet or below are built. The linkage fee is $4 per square foot, and that fee goes towards the building of affordable housing. However, if it's above 1600, it goes to $7. So this initiative is really kind of focusing on the intent of building smaller structures. So I think 1600 I can't say for sure if that's where we'll land, but I think it's an interesting target to try to meet, especially if this initiative passes. And is that two and a half stories? Yes, that could go up to two and a half. You would be okay. That's. That's fine. Let's see if I have anything else. Well, now, that's all my questions. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman. And Mr. Chair, would you introduce yourself for the for the public record as well? Yes. Neil Shay, the applicant. 1625 South Lincoln. Great. Thank you, Councilmember Flynn. Thank you, Madam President. Sarah, is it is it really a down zoning if in fact, we're creating an entitlement for 50% more user units? It seems like an up zoning. So, yeah. I'm Sarah, of course, senior city planner. And I think this down zoning is a very interesting question. I think it could be depending on how you define that. But I'll just reiterate again that this the proposed district would allow only single family homes. Right. That could allow up to two additional units. I'm just not today. Okay. Can I ask you to as just speak a little maybe raise the mic? I'm having a little trouble. Everybody speaking softly tonight. Org's my tonight is I either take your pick. What's the you know the front footage of these lots I believe the lots in this subdivision are 25 feet and these are three lots. Each of these two addresses are three lots. Three lots on the subdivision. So they'll be 75 feet. Am I. Correct? Yes, I think the frontage is around 75 feet. So they would meet the minimum frontage requirement for a potential zone, not amendment for three units on each line. Right in askew, etc.. Yes. Right. And so I wanted to follow up on Councilman Cashman's line because I'm not quite sure I understood the answer. Maybe Neal can help also with the side setbacks and the bulk playing when you're putting the bulk plane in the side setbacks, etc.. Could you really go two and a half stories on a 25 foot frontage? That might be a question for Neil. I don't. Know, Mr. Ashby. Have you plotted that out within the building envelope for ESU? A. That seems awfully narrow. I say this as someone who grew up in a little stone house on a 25 foot front lot right now. That's an interesting question. And Kevin, my partner, and I were discussing this with a duplex. Mom, two and a half stories is probably a lot more attainable. Because you're right, because you have no side step back between the two. Rec and you can actually go up to 35 feet. I don't think we'll get to 35 feet. But you think you could do two and a half stories on a 25 foot line? I think you could potentially get there. But like I said, it's really more the actual height. Two stories. Absolutely. How much use that half stories we're going to have could be pretty marginal. Sounds like a two story shotgun shack. Well, the idea is to have these is attainable and accessible. Okay. Let me see a Sarah. I'm having some difficulty accepting that this is consistent with adopted plans. And so maybe you can talk a little bit more about that. The evidence station area plan recommends a minimum lot size of 4500 square feet. The current zoning doesn't even allow that. The current zoning is 5500 square feet, minimum lot size. So without a zoning change at all, we could not even build two single family units on a split 9000 square foot lot. Is that am I correct in that? Not to repeat yourself. Okay. The current zoning e t you c urban edge ten unit c the minimum lot size is 5500 square feet. So we have two 9000 square foot lots. It seems to me that without a zoning change, the owners could not even build, could not split the lots and build two because it would only be 4500 square feet. So I guess my question is, was the owner advised perhaps to look at E. S U b, which would allow a minimum loft size of 4500 rather than A, which is 3000? Yeah. So again, it's there, of course, your city planner all kind of go back to, I think, what Mira Owen had said earlier through her public comments, or they had mentioned that originally the property owner had came to I had come to a and was thinking about rezoning into a different zoned district. And I think that was the one that you just mentioned. So E2 B And they were going to acquire a good neighbor agreement with that. And the good neighbor agreement was to require single family homes and not two unit or duplexes. So that I know was the conversation was already brought up, but the rezoning request that came in was for ESU. So, you know, we're not out there recommending what people should apply and to all evaluate what request we actually get from the applicant. And then when referring back to the neighborhood plan guidance, I'll reiterate that this was not necessarily a straightforward case. There's not there's some applications that come in that don't have a very clear path. There's others that might have a very clear path. And so when evaluating this rezoning request, we looked at sort of the plan guidance in its entirety. So looking at what does Blueprint Denver say is a city wide plan as well as the seven station area plan? And how is this application consistent with it? So with the minimum 4500 square feet that you mentioned and even station area plan, it described that as the existing conditions. It didn't necessarily describe that as a requirement for proposed rezoning. So that kind of zone lot size was taken as a suggestion, in addition to looking at the densities that it recommended and the recommendation of allowing for a variety of housing types or a diversity of housing types. So looking at the combination of the plan, recommendations and strategies, that's what was found that the rezoning request could be supported by the plan guidance. Okay. That doesn't seem. That doesn't seem. Reasonable. From what I'm reading on Evans Station and Blueprint, it's in the recommendations that that small single family lots 4500 square foot minimum was even in the presentation and then in blueprint as I believe Helene or was saying let me go over the blueprint says a departure from the established lot pattern may be appropriate if the request includes a larger area generally greater than one block. This is only six. Subdivision lots within that entire block on two parcels. And then where the intent is to set a new pattern for the area as expressed by an adopted small area plan. The adopted small area plan says 4500 square feet or significant neighborhood input. So I'm having trouble accepting that, that this is consistent with that these adopted plans either blueprint, horse or even station. But I appreciate the explanation. If single family homes have been the historic pattern and many of the proponents, the supporters of the request say that taking away the entitlement for duplex because they're all turning out way too big way to gentrifying it. And this is the reason they support this rezoning or any idea, you probably weren't around in 2010, the citywide rezoning, but why was this zoned for duplexes in in their entirety at all, if that was the historic pattern? Do you have any view toward the the historic reasons for that? I can't honestly speak to the zoning today, but I can speak to the fact that Blueprint Denver, the citywide plan, had, you know, extensive outreach and coordination and came up with the recommendations it has today. But looking back to the zoning, how the zoned and I you know, you could speculate that potentially it's because it was within proximity to a light rail transit station and other public amenities. Mm hmm. Okay. Thank you, Madam President. That's all I have. All right. Thank you, Councilman Flynn, Councilor Pro Tem Torres, thank you so. Much. Two questions I have actually for Mr. Shay. Hi, Neal. Hi. So the resident who lives in between the two properties, I didn't see their name. In either the support or opposition lists. What was the engagement. With with that. Resident. Mr. Phelps? Actually, initially. Can you hear me? Yes. Initially, he was going to be part of the rezoning. He is in support of it. I think he's been out of town recently. An important distinction on his lot is it's a much smaller lot. It's 60 to 50. He could only do he couldn't do three of these single family homes. He could only do a duplex. If I remember correctly, it's smaller than a 60 to 50 lot, which is actually the predominant lot size that most of these duplexes have been built on. Currently, there are a number of these larger 9000 plus square foot lots like ours. I've yet to see one of those lots to be utilized yet, but the point I was trying to showcase is due to the sheer size of our lot in the 75 foot frontage, you could go 55 feet wide on a duplex, which allows for much larger from square footage. But to your point, Mr. Phelps is a supporter. I can say that because I talked to him. He was part of our rezoning, but he was never planning on redeveloping himself. So we decided to drop him out of the rezoning. Got it. So we received a not a lot of letters of support. Fielded by the town. Since it seems like maybe a property manager. Bianca recently. Are you familiar with that effort? Yes, Bianca. She actually works with my partner. Kevin helps him in property management. So she did a lot of outreach for us as well. Okay. I think I saw, uh, two, three, four, five, six. Eight letters come through there, and it looks like they were all renters. I got a little concerned, or at least a flag was raised. Were those folks. Compensated. For writing a letter of support? Absolutely not. Now, we were very transparent with what we were doing. And as foreigners, a lot of these folks would actually like to be homeowners someday. So I'm offering a more entry level product in a neighborhood where they're already live. They could potentially be buyers for us in the future. So we were very transparent with what we were doing. There was no coercion. They gave those letters of support on their own volition. So nobody was offered $100 off of their current month's rent? No. To support. Okay. Thank you. No more questions. Okay. Thank you, Counselor Torres. Councilmember Sawyer. Thanks, Madam President. I think most of my questions have been answered and asked already by my other colleagues, so thanks for that, guys. Curious what the no vote was from planning board. Hi, sir. Of course, again, senior city planner. So with planning board, the no vote was sort of a disagreement that we don't necessarily have a requirement for the zone law amendment. So they were considering the fact that I think the point that Councilman Cashman was bringing up, the fact that they could raise on the property and then still just build one single family home, they were a proponent of kind of CPD and others exploring other processes where if a rezoning case came in like this, that there could be potentially a requirement of a zone lot amendment or or something like that. So they were, I think, identifying maybe the issue that it's not necessarily guaranteed that there will be six units or increase in housing. And so that I think that was the premise around the No Vote Planning Board. Got it. Okay. Is there a good neighbor agreement in place for this? No, there is not. Okay. So I guess I understand how it would work logistically on the corner a lot, but. If this were to if there were three single family homes, if something were if this parcel on the mid-block were to be lot split and three single family homes were to go there. How would they be accessed without essentially being at home? So the houses would be able to be built on the minimums on the size of 3000 square feet, and they'd have to meet all the minimum requirements for the building form standards, so they'd have to meet everything for the urban house building form. There is alley access in that area, so they'd still have access to the front street as well as alley access from the. Back, I believe. Got it. Okay. I think I understand now access makes makes it a little more clear. Okay. Last question is about the established pattern of lots. So I think, you know, this is unfortunately one of those situations where we have a rezoning that's coming through where an updated area plan and the NPI process would be fantastic. Here to give guidance to what's happening, unfortunately, this neighborhood doesn't get it or hasn't yet been part of the process for an NPI. So the plan is kind of old, right? The Avon Station area plan from 2009 and I think the one before that was. 1993. Yes. Okay. So I guess the established pattern of lots, which is and you mentioned it before, but I just need a little bit of clarification. Are there other parcels in the area that are zoned like this? Yes. So are we looking. To zone to the light blue or the kind of medium blue? The darker blue would sort of be that idea like to look to the darker blue for a pattern of smaller than a lot. So the darker blue is 4500 square feet or less. And for this I'll just point out that all the single unit uses are the ones that are colored in. There are other lots that do have that smaller and a lot size, but they're a different use. So they're two you don't use. Got it. Okay. So everything that's not colored in is duplex, essentially. Probably duplex or not many families or single unit use. Got it. Okay. That's it for me. Thanks. All right. Thank you. Councilman Sawyer. Councilman Herndon. Thank you, Madam President. I have one question for Sara and one for Mr. Lucero. Now you would. You're wondering why no one's asking you a question. So I got you on deck, sir. There was a statement about backdoor deals, and there was some sinister plot that this applicant did not go through the regular chain of processes planning that any other applicant have. So I just want to put that on the record. Was there any way that this application process was different than any other person that applied for a resounding no? Okay, I knew the answer. I just want to make sure. Thank you for that. And they this this was coming up in the comments as well. Precedent, if you vote, this precedent occurs. And let me just say this. This statement that I'm about to make is incorrect. I am in no way obligated to vote on a future rezoning based off a way that I voted on a path rezoning. We judge them on their own individual merit. Is that correct? Good evening. Members of Council. Nate Lucero, Assistant City Attorney. Councilman Hernan You're absolutely correct. Each rezoning is based on the merits of that particular case. Great. Thank you. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you. Councilmember Herndon. Councilman Clark. Thank you. Council President. I just wanted to I know we're in the questions section and wanted to respond to a couple questions that were asked, if that's okay. To Councilman Flynn, the question on the the history of the zoning, much of this area Plat Park Rosedale I believe Councilman Cashman can correct me on that was was Park Overland all stem from the the R to not the R one zoning prior to the zoning change. There were concerted efforts in Plat Park and West Fischbach to move away from that. You still see that on some of the corridors like Pearl Street where it's where you get some t you. But largely they were rezone because there is a pattern of embedded duplexes that have been there for years and years and years within that and in overland that was not change that the. Original proposal under. That was to keep everything to move everything that was R2 directly into t u. And there was a massive down zoning as part of that process in 2010 that took a lot of R to and made it askew. But this area did not. And then Councilmember Torres, I had the same concern when I saw that email this morning. So I did email that property manager specifically asking that, and she did forward me the rest of the conversation she had with that individual. They were having two conversations. That was one was, hey, this is the project in the letter that was very similar to what was seen in some of the other ones that was sent. And then there was a conversation about rents and late fees and all of that that got conflated into one because I had the same concern . So at least what I was told and shown through the email was that there was not a compensation attached to any of the letter writing, that those two things were the were both happening in that email and we didn't see any of that because it was more personal information about rents than there was taken out. Well, that part would not. So. Just wanted to make sure that since I had that information operation forwarded that around and even think of it as I was concerned as I immediately emailed. So thank you, customers. Thank you. Councilmember Clark. Councilmember Sandoval. Thank you, Madam President. So I just have a couple questions. Do we feel like it's blueprint for use or do we feel like it's the intention of Blueprint Denver to have a variety of zone districts? I can say it a different way. Since I've been here, I have always been told for the past ten years CPD does not support quote unquote spot rezonings and which creates a spot on the map that's very different than the current zone district. We've been we've been shot down in northwest Denver numerous times. How is this not a spot zoning? Hi Circus City senior city planner. So to get to your question. So when we're considering rezoning requests, we evaluate them as they come in and we evaluate them against the review criteria. And this case, again, I'll reiterate, was not necessarily straightforward and it was extremely vetted to discuss how it met all the different criteria. And in the end, it was found to be consistent with the criteria. Okay. So one other question. About six months ago with CPD looking at starting a process that would talk about getting rid of single units in the districts in Denver. I'm not sure if I can speak to that or what that conversation was or who was with. But if you have any questions about the rezoning itself, I can answer those. It was this small, it was a working group. Instead of doing the addus and the equity and rezoning we're supposed to have, it's called the residential infill project. And so I think that if you can't answer it can even answer that question because that's something that has been talked about at CPD for a very long time. Hello, Councilwoman Sandoval. And good evening, councilmembers. I'm a barge with community planning and development. Yes, you're right about the residential infill project. Being a broad look at blueprint, Denver's recommendations around expanding housing options in lower scale. Residential. Neighborhoods across the city, that it doesn't specifically say there should be no single unit zoning. It just talks about expanding housing options. And we do still want to look at how we might implement those recommendations in the future. We paused that project because we had so many things going on, group living and other things were happening. There was just the much of the community. Sorry, you'll be able to hear me better if I take this discussion. We were just hearing from the community that it was hard to participate in all the things that were happening and from council as well. So that was on pause. But those recommendations are still adopted in Blueprint Denver and we would like to look at it in the future. And if and when we do, if that. Means that there would be additional housing. Options available in whatever. Zoned district the property is. Zoned, including this one. Then that there would be in the future. But for now, we're just looking, as Sarah said, at this one zoning application that we have before us. Okay. Um, one last question for you or sir, in this particular zone district. In its current form. In the current zone district, could you build a single family house and an detached accessory dwelling unit? If the owner was the owner. Not the. You can't do that with the current developer. Or can you. Sir? Can correct me if I'm wrong, but the t use zoned district would allow a single unit detached house with an accessory dwelling unit. And the current rules about that say that the person that is operating the accessory dwelling unit has to live there. Even in the T's and zone district. Oh, I'm sorry. You're right that. You're very good with zoning. So that is a use limitation that doesn't apply in that zone district. Okay. So currently right now, these lights there could still be it'd be smaller because the zone might dictate the outcome of the accessory dwelling unit, but a bigger zone that actually allows for, I think, a maximum accessory dwelling unit for a thousand. So you could have a single family home and an accessory dwelling unit on the in the current entitlement. Is that correct? Right. Okay. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilmember Sandoval. And thank you for those answers. See no other members in the queue for questions. The public hearing is closed. Comments by members of Council on Council Bill 22, Dash 0016. Councilmember Clark. Thank you, Council President. First, I want to give a big thank you to Sarah. And I know as we heard, this was one that CPD looked a lot at. And as we've heard up here, it's an up zone. It's a down zone, it's single-family, but it's more density. And and I appreciate CPD is really digging into this proposal and taking a look at it and in all the work they put in leading up to here. I want to thank all the people who who showed up on Zoom and came down here to speak. There are a lot of people who spoke for and who spoke against people who I know, people who I respect. And we've got, you know, a builder who hasn't put down on the gas pipes in a very long time, which is also, I think, not voluntarily before the building code gets there. So we've got a lot of really amazing, awesome people with years and years of of life and commitment to this neighborhood on both sides of this. And I think that's part of what makes this so complicated. Right? It was creative. That's why CBD had to take a look at it from a lot of different angles, because it was a creative idea and possible solution to what a lot of folks have said to me in the neighborhood who are on both sides of this tonight and that they don't like at all the curve what's currently happening. Right. The current entitlement, what's what every single lot in this community could be tomorrow with no city council vote, no public process. These huge duplexes coming as something that is is very frustrating and is not in the context of what is currently on the ground in the neighborhood. I know when we talk about rezoning, we talk about the context of what could be there, what that entitlement is, what the zoning is. And we often have a big disconnect. A lot of people also see this on Speer Boulevard in my district where we've had zoning since the fifties and sixties. That allows eight and six and ten storeys, and yet it's been single story. And all of a sudden the economy is right, apparently. And they're all being torn down and going up, you know, six, eight stories. And they're saying, wait a second, what happened? The Old City Council didn't get a vote on that. That's their use by. Right. And so I think responsive to by the applicant to this feeling that this is not what the community wants. And then looking at that play of, okay, so what what's how do you solve for that, right? How do you take a t you district in an area with an adopted station area plan that is within the station area plan for light rail that calls for a level of density, but also try to see if there's a way to preserve that historic character that's called for in the 1993 plan when it comes to single family homes. And so I just want to say thank you to everybody who took time out of their day to be here, who's been a part of this conversation in the community, because I think it's a really important conversation and I think that it is shines an even brighter light on why we need to accelerate NPI whenever we can and why this area did get identified. Hopefully you will stay there as one of the next three areas that will have a neighborhood planning initiative because it desperately needs that. We need to have this conversation about what does this look like? Because development is not only coming, it is here. We heard from one of the speakers that there are six or eight new units on one half of a block there because of the underlying entitlements and because of what's currently there. I just want to before I dove a little deeper, I want to point out a couple of things that were said that I think, you know, often there's that push and pull between what's there right now and what I want versus what could be there and what might be there under this. And those aren't always the same conflicts. And so I think sometimes we were hearing things that were saying, Hey, I don't want that. So I'm no on this zoning. That would also be that way or maybe even worse under the current entitlements we heard in in the emails in today talking about green space and flooding now to you allows you zero space shared wall in between two units where single family well there would be more of them there is spacing in between so that doesn't as we heard not necessarily mean that there's any more green space there might be less green space under the current zoning than under what is being approved and what single family homes we heard are allowed in this to you. There aren't a big enough lot size that you couldn't realistically do that. And so what we are really looking at is something that will be developed like the rest of the neighborhood is right now that's under construction into duplexes. We're not seeing people build single family homes, even though all of those that's an allowable use or a change that would make it as you and would require it to be single family homes. You couldn't build the duplex anymore. And I think that that's why there's this tension. There is a group in the neighborhood who really feels like preservation of that feeling, of that context, of that character, of single family is what's really important to preserve as development comes even at the cost of a few more people on each block, certainly, than there is now. But even then, there would be under to you versus other people saying, hey, if everything in the neighborhood were to go down and you replace it with two units, that's a lot more density. And I'm not I'm not there to say I'd rather have single family and more of them. I'm I'm barely dealing with the fact that this is a dramatic change for a block I've been on for 40 years to to double the number of units that are on it. So. All of that. Having been said, I really have struggled with this because and I've been watching this now play out in neighborhood. Conversations for. I think, over two years. And I really I really felt in the beginning, like this was a creative solution and that the the community was behind it. You heard from Opie and who voted unanimously and was involved very early and came out, said, yes, here's a solution. We instead of these massive duplexes that are enormous in square footage and are even more expensive than everything's expensive, as Councilman Herndon pointed out in committee, the existing structures that are in that neighborhood are not affordable right now with no change, a new no new development, and not the added cost of all the building materials. And and so watching that and seeing that creative solution and seeing how does this actually fit into the criteria? Can this can this work or not, even if that's what the neighborhood wants? Well, do we have plans that would support it? And then in the later stages that has converted to CPD, taking a look at it from a lot of different angles and saying, Yeah, you know what, we think this could work and providing plan support and planning board supporting it. But at the same time, another group in the neighborhood saying, you know what? This isn't what we want. And I think that that ultimately is the crux for me, is this is even if we can shoehorn it in to plans, it's not what the plan drew out. Right. The plan didn't say, hey, this could should be either single family with a super small lots or duplexes. We didn't have that conversation. I mean, to have that conversation, certainly not in 1993. And we didn't have that conversation when the oven station area plan was there. And I think that had this been able to catalyze that community conversation and been brought forward with broad community consensus, never going to be unanimous and everyone agreeing. But but really, the community saying, yes, I understand the tradeoffs. And this is more in line with what that vision was. Even if that's not specifically how the plan envisioned it, then I think that argument that this meets those plans and is something that meets the criteria for us to vote on rezoning is there. But in the end it didn't. In the end we got, you know, a lot more people reaching out, saying that they were opposed to this than were supportive of it. And I think that that means that really I think that this could be a vision for the neighborhood. And again, I appreciate all the work that went into trying to look at something that a group in the neighborhood was saying, this is we want something different. But it's it's shown that we are ahead of that NPI process that is coming in the next 18 months that has that were that conversation has to be had and it has to be had, you know, with a bunch of people who don't agree on the vision right now for where their neighborhood is to arrive on, what is this going to be? Are we going to preserve single family and increase density, or are we giving up on that single family character? And we have the density from the duplexes. And so because of that and that failure to really coalesce the community around a creative solution and a creative vision, I don't think that there is enough plan support here to say that this is what the community wants and what the vision for this neighborhood was without that existing community support. And so I think this is really hard, really hard one for me. And I think in the end, unfortunately, I despite the fact I think a lot of people really do want this in the neighborhood, and I think that that vision could catch fire and could get there. When people really sit down and start grappling with what that's going to be, we're going to need a broader and deeper community conversation, I think, in order to get there. And and without that, I'm going to have to vote no today on this. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you. Councilmember Clarke. Councilmember Flynn. Well, thank you, Madam President. A couple of things were said during the presentation that kind of reinforce how I'm going to vote on this. Sarah had said in response to one of the questions here that we don't evaluate the proposed project in a rezoning. We just look at the application and the plan, support for it, and the other criteria. But most of the support for this from those who testified in favor and from the owner, the support is all based basically on the project. And we've we've styled the zoning request around what we want to build rather than determining whether the zoning itself or whether it should be changed to reflect any adopted plans and whatnot. I agree with Councilman Clark. This you know, this this rezoning would result in an outcome that both sides at least would like in part. And that's kind of to put a damper to kind of put a stop to the construction of some of these outsized and very expensive duplex boxes that we're seeing that are driving up property values and driving out older owners who might be sitting on on smaller bungalows or wood frame, single family units that, you know, that are worth a lot more than than $450,000. And and and the dirt they're sitting on is worth more than that. But we have to evaluate not the project here, but the request and whether it's consistent with with current adopted plans. And it isn't. And I can't ignore that, even if I would prefer stopping overdevelopment under the present zoning of a twin unit that allows three quarter million dollar duplexes to go up and eventually drive out the, you know, the family for 40 years next door in a little bungalow. So I don't see it as consistent with adopted plans. You haven't station area plan says minimum lot size 4500 square feet. Blueprint says departing from the established lot pattern requires two things that we don't have here. The request should include a larger area of at least a one full block. There should be and there should be an expressed intent to change that pattern, either in an adopted small area plan, which we don't have. In fact, we have 4500 square foot as a minimum or significant neighbor neighborhood input, which we also don't have. The presentation tonight showed us that the established lot pattern in this neighborhood is that 96% of the lots in this neighborhood are 4500 square feet or larger. The 4% that are not are generally split lots sitting on alleys or tandem house sites, 85% of the lots or 5500 square feet or larger, which fits under the current zoning . The appropriate zoning for this neighborhood most likely is ESU or t, u b, which would allow development on 4500 square foot lots and would implement literally implement the the adopted plans. So with that, I will also not be supporting us tonight. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you. Councilmember Flynn, Councilmember Sandoval. Thank you, Madam President. And I would just like to thank Sarah for all your hard work. This is a tough one. I, I use this term. I find myself in a pickle often in city council where it's not just one way or the other. There's a lot of gray area sitting up here as a council member, and I have to wade in that gray area often. And so I say to my friends, I find myself in a pickle, which is where I find myself this evening. With that, I do not believe it is the intent of Blueprint Denver to have different zone districts splattered with among the others for almost ten years ten years. This June I have been working for this city and I continue to hear from CPD about the intent of spot zoning. And my neighborhood is obsessed with this term in certain areas where they won't even support an accessory dwelling unit because they feel like it is a spot zoning even within the existing zone law and the blocks establish a pattern of smaller zoned lots, and it's a conflict that I'm constantly living with in this term of quote unquote spot zoning, which I don't even like, but the public does use and my neighborhood does use. I feel like our residential zoned districts or residential low zone districts need some more flexibility, and I think that needs to have a discussion. And that's, I think, what the residential infill project will look at is this same exact process that we're talking about in this same exact issue. And I also believe to Councilman Clark's comment that we are bringing the cart before the horse. That this area is in desperate need of a neighborhood planning initiative. And I truly believe all neighborhoods need a planning initiative. And that's why I will continue to support having neighborhood planning initiatives in our neighborhoods and not always supporting them in our downtown area, because we end up pitting neighborhood neighbors against each other because there is no plan guidance except for a really, really high level plan such as Blueprint Denver. And with that, I will not support this rezoning tonight, but thank you all for coming out. Thank you. Councilmember Sandoval, Councilmember Black. Thank you, Madam President. As I said earlier, this one is. Unusual and it's still not black and white for me. I do really respect CPD in the work that you do and when you recommend something I listen. Recently in the past few months, you brought up the reasoning that you didn't recommend. That doesn't happen very often, but the fact that you all decided this, though challenging, met the requirements really means a lot to me. I understand what everyone else has said tonight. Interesting that Councilman Flynn said that he thought the support was based on this proposed project. I think that's probably true. I also. Think. That the people who are opposed to it are opposed because they don't want any development. I don't think anyone is in support of a giant duplex on both of those lots. And so we up here hear a lot of people come for public comment because they don't want any development whatsoever. And development is inevitable in our city. Some neighborhoods near where I live, University Hills in particular, they're tearing down similar kinds of houses and building 4000 square foot single family homes. So houses that were once affordable are now not affordable at all. And it has completely changed the character of the neighborhood. It's changed the character of the school. So I think this is a creative solution. And I am going to support it tonight. I again, I don't think it's a black and white. I do support more units. We need more units. And I appreciate that these are. Lower. Price point than what would be built in for units that were in duplexes. So I will be supporting this tonight. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Black. Councilmember Herndon. Thank you, Madam President. This is definitely be an interesting for for a Tuesday. And it's so I will be in support and I will get a little bit into it because I do believe that the criteria was met and hearing opposition from the speakers. Rarely did anyone talk criteria. They talked traffic. They thought density to is enough. And I appreciate my colleagues who who did get deeper with their questions. I did not hear as I was listening how that criteria was not met. And I will do something that I've rarely done and talk a little bit about the development, because that's what everybody else is talking about as well. I think Blueprint wants us to get it right. And I sympathize when there are neighborhoods that don't have neighborhood plans. I mean, Council President Gilmore, myself, our mom, Bella, that was one of the first ones, far northeast councilman sorry, East Colfax, 1990s. And I'm glad that that was first. But these neighborhoods are changing. And until we can get it, let's make decisions that will preserve the character of those neighborhoods, because we always hear that character of neighborhoods . And I remember the conversation, Councilman Clark, we talked about affordability and pricing. And I have Zillow on my computer right now. And I looked it up, you know, 1990, Huron is valued and I get it. It's Zillow, but it's value that 581 that parcel 1974 for 75. So that's over half a million dollars. And across the street on Huron, I'm looking at three homes that are valued at 689. 647. 624. And so how can we help with the character of those neighborhoods so we can not make a decision or vote no status quo? And we know there are going to be units that are going to be built at a much greater, higher price point. The neighborhood that that street is going to change. Or we can make a decision that has been discussed with the applicant and the neighborhood. At This is what I want to build at a 600 k price point. Which is aligned with what I'm looking at right now. Single family homes. I believe that's a decision. That the neighbors would get behind. We've heard it, but there are people are not. And as Councilman Clark says, you make a decision, you're going to you know, you're going to upset people. But I believe the criteria has been met. And as I look at what would come from this decision of supporting the criteria, I believe that helps in line with what neighbors want, maintaining character and trying to keep our neighborhoods as affordable as they can. So I, I get the tension back and forth, but I will be in support today. Thank you, my president. Thank you. Councilmember Herndon. Councilmember Hines. Thank you. Council President. I I don't want to repeat that. A lot of the stuff that my colleagues have said. I do want to talk about two things. Blueprint Blueprint talked about how our city is growing and how we should shape the growth of our city. We've gotten we've secret out Denver is now a destination. We've added 130,000 people to the city of Denver in the last ten years. Blueprint Denver talked to the state demographers office and assumed that we would get an additional 200,000 people by 2040. And this was passed in 2019. A week or two before we took office. And but the idea was that we would grow by another 30% in population in the city of Denver by 2040. So I, I agree that my colleagues have mentioned that, that a lot of people talked about parking in in opposition. And that's not want of one of the criteria, honestly. But but we have we have to have that discussion anyway about how we get around our city. And if we don't think of ways that, that we can add density, smart density, then then we'll have issues with with being able to get around our city. I mean, I hear a lot of complaints about parking and traffic in my district. I think ours is the densest district in the city. We certainly have the densest 3 to 4 densest neighborhoods in the city in my district. And a lot of people like to visit my district, too. So they live there. People visit there as well. And so we get a lot of issues with parking. I want to thank the applicants for for considering ways to add additional density so that we have density throughout the city because in District ten, we're getting. 630 story buildings in Golden Triangle, multiple. Multiple of them will break ground in the next few months, and that's that. Sandwiched between them is an 11 story building and a 17 story building, all in just a two block area. So while District ten is taking a lot of the density and it should, because it's in the city center, we have to think about making making sure that that the city grows in a smart way. And and so I'm really happy that that District ten is taking some of that a fair amount of that density, because it creates that 20 minute neighborhood where people don't have to use cars at all to get around to where they want to live, work and play. And I guess the only other thing that I wanted to say is District ten also has neighborhoods that have never had a neighborhood plan, a plus areas never had a neighborhood plan, country club has never had a neighborhood plan. And and so, you know, there are people who are very interested in neighborhood plans that have never had one. And we've had a lot of discussions about neighborhood plans because the central area plan was in four of my neighborhoods. So I see that. And then I also recognize that my colleague, Councilmember Clark, is very close to the conversations and has has really done a lot of the hard work to try to work with the neighbors, more so than I have. And and I also recognize the pain of neighborhood plans, first of all, going through the neighborhood plan, because the central area plan and also the pain of not going through neighborhood plans because of other areas, particularly in Alamo policy, where they're 12 storey apartment buildings going up. So I also recognize that we need to be smart and methodical and in our implementation of of of building our city. And so I'll just leave it at that. Thank you. Council President. Thank you, Councilmember Hines. Councilmember Sawyer. Thanks, Madam President. I won't repeat what my colleagues have said. I think the issue here is that we're damned if we do and we're damned if we don't. If we do vote yes, we maintain single family homes and affordability, which is the goal of our community. We hear that from our residents all the time. If we vote no, it will be a duplex, you know, that is large, that is overpriced. That is something that we hear regularly we don't want in our community. So I really wish that this was consistent with adopted plans because I want to vote yes. But it can't, legally speaking. This is not consistent with adopted plans, and that means I am required to vote no under our criteria. And that's a shame because this is an awesome project. It's a good idea. It's a creative solution. Thank you, Neal, for that. I want to vote yes, but I can't. It is not consistent with adopted plans, and there are five criteria that we have to vote on. And one of them is consistency with adopted plan. So I it's such a shame, but I have to be a no tonight. Thanks. Thank you. Council Member Sawyer and I am not seeing anybody else in the queue. I will go ahead and round out the comments before we vote. I want to thank the community members who joined us tonight and testified during the public hearing and. Neighborhood plans are great, but neighborhood plans are just that. Their plan and they roll up into the other plans that we have with blueprint being that ultimate plan. And when you really talk about what we need in our city. We need density. We need gentle density. We need to allow more people to live in our neighborhoods. And it's not always going to be in the same single family home that was on that lot that you went by growing up. It's our city is changing and we need places for people to live in our city. And when folks talk about the character of neighborhoods, it's sometimes hard to tease out. If it's the character of our neighborhoods being code for we don't want anybody else in our neighborhood or we want to see the same brick. And the same look of a neighborhood. It's really hard to tease that out. But all hearken back to what Sarah said at the beginning of her presentation was that this is the same density that is allowed today in a slightly different way. And I also have to respect. Nate Lucero and our lawyers within CPD that they're not going to bring us something that could be legally challenged. Because I, I trust what they do. And I've known Nate for a long time, and he has never given us bad advice. And then again as well, the planning board, if this was so inconsistent or so egregious, I would have thought the planning board would vote it down. The planning board approved it 8 to 1. And so in good faith of all of the work that has gone in and with the Overland R.A. supporting this rezoning, I believe, although it's not exactly what folks would want to see, it does meet the criteria. And I am a yes on this tonight. Madam Secretary, roll call on Council Bill 22, Dash 0016, please. See tobacco. No. Park? No. Flynn. No. Herndon. I know. Cashman. Kenny Ortega, I. Sandoval No. Sawyer? No. Torres No. Black eye. Madam President. I. Madam Secretary, close the voting and announce the results. Eight Nays. Five I's, eight nays. Council Bill 20 2-0016 has failed. It only has five eyes. And so we want to thank our planners who joined us here this evening and the community members who stayed with us. And we're going to go ahead and move on to our last hearing of the evening. Councilmember Ortega, will you please put Council Bill 20 2-0093 on the floor for final passage?

Councilor Louijeune called Docket # 0321, Petition for a Special Law re: Securing Environmental Justice in the City of Boston, from the Committee on Government Operation. No objection being heard, the matter was before the body. Councilor Edwards motioned to amend language. Second Councilor Breadon. On motion of Councilor Louijeune, the Petition was passed as amended.

BostonCC_04062022_2022-0321

Duncan Number 0321 petition for a special law regarding securing environmental justice in the city of Boston. Thank you. The chair recognizes Councilor Arroyo, chair of the Committee on Government Operations Counsel. Royal. You have the floor. Q Mr. Chair, the Committee on Government Operations had the working session on Monday, April 4th, on Docket 0321 petition for a special law regarding securing environmental justice in the city of Boston, which was sponsored by Councilor Liddy Edwards. I'd like to thank my council colleagues for attending. Councilor Flynn, Councilor Lara, Councilman here. Councilor Murphy, Councilor Flower City Councilor, BLOCK and Councilor. We're out. This home rule petition would declare that a state of emergency exists in the city of Boston with regards to environmental injustice and climate change. If passed, this legislation would amend the EPA's Enabling Act and remove public services corporations ability to seek an exemption to all Boston zoning laws by petitioning the State Department of Public Utilities. Instead, this legislation will give the Building Commissioner the authority to enforce environmental justice standards. If the Commissioner determines that a use or proposed use of a building structure or land in the city would negatively impact environmental rights afforded to residents by state law. The Building Commissioner would have the authority to issue a stop work order or suspend any issued permits, licenses or authorizations associated with the use or proposed use. At the working session, the committee heard from several environmental justice advocates about the urgency of securing environmental justice in Boston and protecting local communities. The utility company representatives stated that they believe that existing state regulations provided sufficient environmental justice protections. The sponsor clarified that the legislation would grant extra authority to the Building Commissioner and that more specific building standards can be crafted by the Zoning Commission and the Building Commissioner if the state passes this. There was a suggestion that language be added, specifying that the process of deciding those building standards shall be guided by the needs of a community through a civic engagement process. So while we wait to receive specific language amendments that were discussed at the working session, we're recommending that this remains in committee. Thank you. As Council Royal. When any of our colleagues like to speak on this matter. To Ireland 0321 will remain in committee. Mr. Clerk, please read docket. 029520295 Order for rehearing to explore municipal bonds and other fiscal options to increase affordable housing and community investments. The chair recognizes Councilor Fernandez Anderson, Chair of the Committee and Ways and Means Counsel. Fernandez Anderson. You have the floor. Can we. Can we refer back? So I left my. Yes. Thank you. Mr. Carr, can we go on to docket 0313 and we'll return to Dawkins. 0295.0313 message in order for an appropriation or in the amount of $27,205,854 from fiscal year 2022. Community Preservation Fund Revenues for Community Preservation Projects at the Recommendation of the City of Boston Community Preservation Committee.

A bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification for 1634, 1640, 1642, 1650 and 1680 Sheridan Boulevard in West Colfax. Approves an official map amendment to rezone properties from U-RH-3A and U-SU-C2 to U-MS-2 and U-MS-3 (urban row-home and single-unit to urban main-street districts), located at 1634, 1640, 1642, 1650 and 1680 Sheridan Boulevard in Council District 1. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 6-18-19. Community Planning and Development has determined that the requirement for a legal protest (signatures by the owners of 20 percent or more either of the area of the lots included in the proposed change or of the total land area within 200 feet from the perimeter of the area proposed for change) has been met (petition signatures represent 0% and 21%, respectively).

DenverCityCouncil_09162019_19-0577

11 I was one accountable. 818 has passed if you. For our. You are welcome and invited to stay with us because we're still going. If you're not going to, I would ask that you please exit as quietly as possible in respect for the people who are still here for the next one. And take your conversations out into the hall if you have a conversation. Councilman Sawyer, will you please put Council Bill 577 on the floor? I move counts will 19 dash 0577 be placed upon final consideration and do pass. It has been moved and seconded. I'm sorry. The public hearing for Councilor Bill 577 is open. May we have the staff report? Theresa may, Sarah with community planning and development. I can get to the right place. So this is a map amendment. It is an application to. And again. Ask if you are not staying for this next item, we are into it already. So if you could please continue your conversations until you're out in the hallway, please, and exit quickly. Thank you. And can we ask that the doors be closed also? All right. All right. Should I start again? Let's give it a try. Go for. It. So, Teresa Lucero with community planning and development. This is a map amendment application to rezone property at 1634, 1640, 1642, 1650 and 1680 Sheridan Boulevard. The request is to rezone from urban single unit and urban house three storey to urban main street to and Urban Main Street three. So this is in City Council District one in the West Colfax Statistical neighborhood. Again, the request is to rezone from single unit and row house three to Main Street two and three. The urban context is characterized by one and two unit residential embedded in with some commercial uses townhomes, shopfront buildings from 30 to 35 feet or 30 to 45 feet. And this is intended to promote pedestrian scaled commercial streets and typically located along our collector or arterial streets. So existing zoning to the north is Sloan's Lake Park. So open space and to the south is the Rowhouse. Three story to the east is a single unit and row house three and then across Sheridan is Edgewater, which has a I'm sorry, I'm finding my R two, which is a two family zoning and then a little bit of Lakewood, which is RMF, which is residential multifamily. So the existing land uses a mix of duplex and single unit, mostly single unit surrounding to the north of the park, a mixture of single unit and two unit to the east and south and then actually the same in Edgewater Cross Sheridan Boulevard. So informational notice on this application went out in April of 2018. A revised application notice went out in February of 2019. Planning Board held a legally posted public hearing and voted unanimously to support this application or recommend approval of this application. We were at Liberty in June of this year and then of course, we're here today with a legally notified hearing. So there are several RINO's in the area. There is one letter of opposition from the Sloan's Lake Neighborhood Association, primarily objecting to the heights above the base plain and then several, well, one letter of support and 44 letters of opposition. Now, this doesn't count the letters that you received in the last two days from the applicant. I my understanding is, I think 12 letters of support, one of them containing several signatures. So existing form, building scale in form. These pictures kind of show you the top four. Are the properties being considered for rezoning the middle? In the middle row is Sloan's Lake Park. The middle right is the property to the south on Sheridan. The bottom two on the left are on Zenobia Street on properties directly adjacent to to the subject property. And then the bottom right is the some properties in Edgewater across Sheridan Boulevard. So the criteria we will go through the plans that apply our current plan 2000, Blueprint 2019 and the West Colfax Plan, which was adopted in 2006. Plan. Details in your staff report. Some of the policies that the staff believes apply building housing as a continuum to serve residents across a range of incomes and needs. Creating a greater mix of housing in every neighborhood, a mix of housing types, encouraging infill development that's consistent with the surrounding neighborhood, and promoting development and infrastructure where services are already in place. Blueprint Denver This is an urban context. I again small multi-unit, residential and mixed use areas embedded with one and two unit residential uses in residential areas, low scale multi-unit buildings also sometimes embedded. A future place is residential, low, medium, which is a mixture of low and middle scale units, residential interspersed in single and two unit areas with a building scale of three stories or less in height. The street types for Sheraton Boulevard, a mixed use arterial for 17th Avenue, a residential collector for any place to the south, a local street. Fifth Future Growth Strategy Blueprint. Denver is all other areas of the city, which is anticipated to see 20% of new housing growth and 10% of new employment. Land use concept in the West Colfax Plan is Main Street, which is a linear and oriented to the street. The plan calls for a height of 2 to 5 stories with a mixture of land uses and creating that comfortable pedestrian environment on a main street. The framework plan recommendations that apply are rezoning commercial properties on our main streets, including Sheridan Boulevard. For these kinds of uses, promoting a range of housing types and costs at higher densities in our town centers and main streets, supporting infill development and focusing both structural and use intensity on our main streets, transit stations and town centers. The West Colfax Plan also has district plans which speak to the character of an area. They called this area the Main Street Pig and Whistle District and consider said we should consider the impacts of this main street on the future adjacent residential and with deeper parcels should consider Main Street two and three, which were a former Chapter 59 Main Street, which translated into five and five and eight actually in our current code. So staff believes this is consistent with the applicable plans that by using a standard zoned district, we're furthering the uniform application of our regulations by implementing our plans and allowing character that's in development with the area, we're furthering public health, safety and welfare. Justifying circumstances is changed conditions. This is an area seeing a lot of change with the West Line, with the redevelopment of St Anthony's and staff believes this is the appropriate justifying circumstance. And we did talk a little bit earlier about the context and staff believes this is these two zone districts that are intended to promote safe , active, pedestrian scaled commercial streets are the appropriate zoned district and with that, staff recommends approval. Thank you very much. We do have 23 individuals signed up to speak this evening. Thank you so much for sticking with us late into the evening here. If I can ask if we can free up this front bench for people because I'm going to call five at a time up here so that we can get through everybody quickly. So the first five, if you'd come up to the front bench, Corey Manders, Annemarie Manders, Ricky Lang, David Weber, Bruce O'Donnell. I mean, that's five. Yes. So go ahead. Cory Manders, you're up first. Hello, city council members. I appreciate the opportunity to speak in favor of rezoning the 1634 to 1680 block of Sheridan Boulevard. My name is Cory Manders. I am. The owner of 1634 Sheridan. Boulevard. I have lived at this residence since 2004 and have welcomed the growth and. Positive changes that we've seen in recent years. While watching those growth, we owners realized that combining our properties to offer multifamily apartments would allow the most and best use of limited space with the smallest carbon footprint and decided to pursue rezoning to comply with Blueprint. Denver and the West Colfax Plan. When discussions began. The city requested. That we donated 16 feet of the sidewalk. We eagerly agreed, being that. My wife, dog and I walk through the neighborhood daily based on community opposition and the request of then Councilmember Espinosa. We entered into mediation to work to resolve the majority of the neighbors concerns. During the 16 month process. The following. Modifications were made based on the neighborhood. Feedback. Initial proposal had a. Five story building and was supported by Blueprint, Denver Draft and West Colfax Plan. Throughout the course of mediation, it was reduced from five stories to four stories to three stories, and ultimately, at the request of the neighbors, a combination of two and three stories. In. Accordance with a revamped. Blueprint, Denver and West Colfax Plan. We have also recorded a. Covenant to ensure input from the neighbors as reflected. This includes requiring two separate buildings. Height limitations that are lower than allowed by code, for example, behind my house. Building height is limited to below 30 feet, which is less than 35 allowed. And as you zoning. On Zenobia. Blueprint down very correctly identifies this is an area that is underutilized in. Decay and in major. Need of reinvestment. And closing. Ask City Council. Vote to approve the rezoning of 1634 to 1680 shared and to you. AMS two and. UMass three. Thank you again. For your time and consideration. Thank you. Next up, Anne Marie Manders. Good evening, city council members. Thank you for the opportunity to speak in support of the rezoning. Of the 1634 to. 1680 block of Sheridan Boulevard. I'm Anne Marie Manders, and along with my husband, Corey, I'm the owner of 1634 Sheridan. I've been a Sloan's Lake resident for the past ten years. During this time, I've witnessed much positive change in the neighborhood. The most recent being this past spring, with the addition of a sidewalk at Sloan's Lake. Along both 17 excuse me, both. 17th Street and Sheridan Boulevard. I love living here, mainly because of its walkability and proximity to everyday. Resources and of course, the park. I truly want what is in the best interest of the community as a whole. Which is why I believe redeveloping this block makes sense and is smart change that will continue to enhance. An already thriving and growing area. What I personally feel to be the most beneficial change the rezoning can offer is the creation of a much needed sidewalk on Sheridan. Currently, there is no sidewalk, just an uneven. Sloped dirt path. It's extremely unsafe and nearly impassable. Especially when there's any type of precipitation. As a result, were forced to walk down the alley, which is often riddled with trash and overgrown weeds. Residents of the Zenobia BLOCK. Do not use the alley for vehicular access, so its care is often neglected. The only alternatives to the alley route are. To risk our lives navigating the treacherous terrain or playing a deadly game of Frogger across Sheridan Boulevard. Members of the community who use wheelchairs must also. Take the alley. Or worse, utilize the streets, because sidewalks in the neighborhood are only 32. Inches wide. Maintaining the front of our home is dangerous. And an unwanted. Unwanted job. We can only do in the early morning hours when traffic is light for fear of being hit by passing. Cars, traveling up to 40 miles per hour, just feet away from us. Installing a proper sidewalk and tree line would allow. Easy, direct connectivity to Sloan's Lake Park and safer access to daily necessities like bus routes. Bike lanes. Grocery stores, doctors, etc.. In addition. Approval would give the community a complete sidewalk for the entire block at one time versus piecemeal. If and or when homes are redeveloped, we owners. Entered into the mediation process with the intent to work with our fellow residents to craft an offering that not only incorporates. Their input, but also runs in accordance with Blueprint Denver and the West Colfax Plan. This rezoning does exactly that. So while I understand the opposition's fear of change. Because with any. Change comes the potential for risk. This is smart. Necessary change that makes sense. And these perceived risks will be. Easily outweighed by the benefits our community will gain. In conclusion, I request that. City Council vote to approve the reasonable rezoning of 1634 to 1680. Sheridan to you must. Too, and you must three in conjunction with the vision of. Blueprint Denver and the West Colfax. Plan. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, recalling. I am Rick. Lang. I'm the owner of 16 a property at the corner of 17th and shared. I brought along the masters of the petition that we turned in. Never should have got it. This these petition has 102 signatures that support the rezoning. And we captured those from many of of the people around town. And we did it all in four days. We got that many. If we would have had more time and started up this had this idea earlier, we probably captured several hundreds of them. So anyway, the three of us or the three other associated parties or property owners, along with myself collectively formed an assemblage to pursue this rezoning and to have all the properties developed and sold as one assemblage. As such, we all participated in the mediation in response to neighbors input to reduce zoning. We honor the requests by compromising from our original five stories to four, then from 4 to 3, then to a combination of 2 to 3. Two and three stories to ultimately cross. Compromising to. Um, as to and um. As three which is an exact fit and complies with plan, recommendation and blueprint. Denver, 2019 and the West Colfax part. A 16 storey building was rezone on 17th and Meade Street with absolutely no mediation. They did not care what the neighbors thought. However, we did work with our neighbors and gave many concessions regarding height parking and rooftop rooftop limitations. And despite that, we weren't able to achieve an agreement and support from the local neighbors. Our assemblage did submit and recorded covenant to ensure input from neighbors are reflected for the following lower building heights that are more than allowed in zoning. Guaranteed 25% more parking that is required in zoning place limitations and restrictions on use of rooftops. And it's very important to note that this project goes if this project goes through and the rezoning is approved, absolutely no one will be forced from their home. Lastly, homes concerns because this is not desired, desirable because there is not a desirable much needed tree lined sidewalk along Sheridan frontage arterial for a safe pedestrian environment. The alley is routinely used as a transit corridor between Colfax and Sloan's Lake Park by the homeless. Because of all the neighbors across the alley on this block have six foot high fences and never use the all except for trash. There are totally oblivious to the excessive problem of the homeless. Routinely. Using their trash. I'm sorry, but your time. Your time is up. And storage area for clothes. I'm sorry, but your time is up. Next up, David Weber. Okay. I am David Weber, the owner of two houses at 1640 and 1650 Sheridan Boulevard. And I'm one of the home homeowners who are applying for the reason I've owned these properties for 17 years and lived in the neighborhood for 26 years. I grew up in Denver, taught high school geography for DPS for 25 years, and I'm well aware of the issues dealing with Denver's growth. As far as the rezoning goes, the neighbors of Zenobia and others have multiple complaints that can be boiled down to three main issues. Size of the buildings, parking, loss of community. In my opinion, these issues have been addressed during a lengthy period of mediation where we went from a five story proposal to a three story proposal under the old blueprint Denver. And when we did offer this compromise, we were rejected by the neighbors. Then in the advent of the new blueprint, Denver, we compromised again and went to a two building proposal. So two separate buildings, zoning to UMC two and UMC three. We also added 1 to 1 parking, lowered the height of the building roughly equivalent to row house three. Then we limited rooftop and retail uses of the building and would add three bedroom units. And of course, we would have a 14 to 16 foot sidewalk built on the block. These compromises were also unacceptable to the neighbors, even though all of these compromises were well within the framework of the Planning Board's guidelines. It's obvious that true compromise is nearly impossible to attain unless we had offered row rowhouse zoning, which to me seems completely incompatible for a busy street like. Sure. It's understandable that people dislike change. In fact, most of us, including myself, yearn for the good old days. However, this isn't the reality of the situation. The world isn't a static place. As I've seen, Sloan's Lake in the last 26 years become revitalized and vibrant in its outlook. However, it is also now debilitating, expensive, and this is causing established residents who live on a tight budget to move out. Surprisingly, the struggle to rezone our land has been met with many claims of the neighborhood's demise. We are miffed as to why we can't share the resources better or share again on Sheridan and adapt a new era that's facing the city with better transportation and less expensive housing. Denver's currently considered one of the greatest cities in the United States, and that's partly because we have a forward looking planning board. I just hope our city is agreeable to sensible change, and I hope the city sees this. Zoning change will help preserve our diversity through mixed use, smart use and the best use to create more complete neighborhoods. The 20 minute neighborhoods, so to speak. And I believe we can continue to make Denver right again. I'm sorry, but your. Time is. Up. Neighborhood. Thank you very much. Yes. Next up, Bruce O'Donnell. Thank you, Mr. President. Members of council. Good evening. I Bruce O'Donnell at 770 Sherman Street and I'm the applicant's representative on this rezoning request. My old friend Jennifer Moulton, the former city of Denver planning director, taught me that cities never stay the same or remain constant. They are always changing. Cities either grow or shrink. Both growing and shrinking come with challenges. Cities that continue to shrink begin to die. Look at the aptly named Rust Belt cities. Denver's a growing city. Our city plans recognize and plan for inevitable growth. The most important of these plans is Blueprint Denver, which is adopted a short five months ago by city council with substantial neighborhood input along this stretch of shared input from immediate neighbors, many of whom are here tonight, resulted in a blueprint. Future land use designation of urban residential low medium with building heights up to three stories. The community's voice was heard and has now adopted city policy. The requested combination of UM's two and three zoning is an exact fit for this blueprint prescribed future land use and is an appropriate implementation step of blueprint. The combination of UM's two and three was crafted in direct response to neighborhood input, keeping the overall scale and future development compatible with the surrounding context, especially when compared to our original application for five story zoning over a year ago. In addition to honoring the community input to reduce building heights through zoning, we have also been responsive to neighbors by directly incorporating their input into a protective covenant and deed restriction that has been recorded with a Denver Corcoran recorder and runs with the land. The Covenant reduces building heights below. What is allowed in zoning, requires two buildings, requires a parking minimum, prohibit specifically requested and unwanted uses, requires three bedroom units in limits the uses on rooftops. These restrictions and requirements assure better compatibility with the neighborhood and surrounding context. An unfortunate result of shared and being a jurisdictional boundary in Denver's edge is that shared and has long been ignored, making Sheridan a forgotten place to include not having a sidewalk on a blueprint identified mixed use arterial in an RTD bus route. This rezoning can correct this, bringing eyes on the street along with amenities. This rezoning creates a chance to bring this block of share and it into Denver rather than continue the edge condition that backs itself up to Denver because Denver can't stay the same and it will continue to grow. And because Blueprint tells us what type of growth should occur here, and because this rezoning meets the criteria established in Denver, Denver's Zoning Code Section 12 24.10. And because the recorded covenant memorializes the applicant's responsiveness and commitments to community input, I respectfully request the City Council vote yes in Approve Council Bill 19 0577 rezoning this property to USM two and three. Thank you. Thank you. All right, so I'm going to call for the next five. We have her mine, Blough, Ephraim Buelow, Joel Unger and DeWitt and five old Dawn Gaillard. If you come up to the front. And. Her mind. Wow. All right, you're up. I'm on my way. I'm Hermione mind. Can you pull the microphone down so we can hear from her? Thank you very much. I'm from in Blount. I live at 1656 Zenobia Street. For the last 46 years, we have enjoyed our life on the West Side. We put my glasses on. I can see where. So I want us to see. Ladies and gentlemen, good evening. It was very interesting to listen to you earlier on. With the different discussion. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak here tonight. Two years or so ago, I stood here as well and left this room with a city in my heart. Tonight, my hopes and expectations are flying as high as a kite because things have changed. And no one needs in this neighborhood a different than the way a few years ago. But I'm here tonight in the hope that your values, your intelligence, your wisdom will guide you to make the best decision and vote against. A much too large. Project with not enough parking spaces. Yes. We need sidewalks. One day, I hope an entire generation of West Sider, as we call ourselves, young people, will point to this city council on every one of you. And thank you. For your. Wise decision to preserve a neighborhood established many years ago. And to preserve it for many more years to come. Please, please vote, as they say in French at their club. But I'm a bottle conscious. With your soul and your conscience. I also want to add I have a few more seconds. My husband and I have enjoyed living at 1656. These days. My husband is no longer skiing. He's 91. He's a Holocaust survivor and he's a Korea war veteran. His only joy is to sit in the back on the porch, and every single evening when he feels good enough, look out to the west side and look at the sunset. It is beautiful. Thank you. I'm sorry, but your time is up. Please don't take this opportunity. All right. Next up from Buffalo. Yeah. Hi. My name is from Buffalo. I live at 4634 West 14th Avenue in the West Colfax neighborhood. I'd like to say that we live we have lived in. The neighborhood for about 19 years. And what we live in is the historic remnant really of what this community was. This community was a very vibrant Jewish community and a very vibrant Latino community. And when we moved in 19 years ago, there wasn't a Saturday that would go by that we wouldn't hear mariachis playing and, you know , people celebrating and having parties and things. This community has now been gentrified to the point of non-recognition. The the our young people can't afford to buy houses. There are our community is is has been destroyed. And I look at this and say, this is this is the last piece that we have the last chance to preserve the I think, the oldest historical Jewish community in in in Denver. And the last chance to preserve our way of life as a family community. And, you know, I've got four grandchildren who live in this neighborhood. And the increased traffic density that this will bring makes it more dangerous to try to cross the street, especially if you're a little guy and a row of parked cars along the streets means you can't see what's coming until you dart out in between them. It's frightening. And this this idea of. Bringing in all this density of units. Along Sheridan and the only access won't be from from Sheridan, it'll be from Zenobia. And from. Any place. So you're going to have this enormous traffic jam on those streets. You're just going to have all these these cars trying to get in to this area. And although I know people are saying, no, people don't really need so many cars these days, the reality is, and you'll forgive me, but the kind of people who can afford to live in these kind of housing units, people who are coming into our neighborhood, they've all got cars. They have two cars per person, per per couple. And there's a lot of traffic and there's a lot of density. And it makes it a place where you cannot safely let your children play. And that is a shame. I raise my children in this neighborhood and my daughter is trying to raise her children in this neighborhood. And I'm very afraid that without you to stand up and protect us and our community, that that will not be able to continue. Thank you. And next up, Joel Unger. Good evening. My name is Joel Unger. I live at 4930, West 17th Avenue, Corner Yates, a block away from the property under properties under question. Our family has lived there since 1969. I'm here to speak against the application. And primarily because this property is a substandard, defective property. And I'll explain why. You can access it on foot or by parachute, but it's hemmed in on all sides. Sheridan with its traffic, with its noise and its fumes as on the West Side, 17th Avenue, which is now overburdened with traffic. If you have an idea how bad 17th Avenue can get, just think of what it looks like after a Bronco game. Well, the 17th now, all the people running to King Soopers and target and the population increase on the east side of Sloan's Lake AV overburdened 17th Avenue. So you can't really access the property to or from 17th Avenue, particularly with all the traffic turning in from Sheridan, Zenobia is blocked off by the residents, so the only egress or entrance is any court, which is a small street to the south end of this property. That street, if you come out the alley on to Annie Court, if you make a right, turn your right into Sheridan, you can't go from any court, the Sheridan, without losing your front end. Cars are whizzing by at 35, 40 miles an hour. The only choice you have is to make a left turn and go to the Zenobia where you can't go north, because that'll take you into 17th. So you can go south to Colfax and in Colfax you can't get across Colfax. It's an obvious you can only go west. If you want to go east, you have to wend your way across till Wolf where there's a light where you can access Colfax and go east. This property is ill suited for high density. It's not that high density is a bad idea, but this property will create all kinds of difficulties and consequences. And therefore I. Urge the council to reject it. Thank you. Thank you. Next up in a do it. Good evening, City Council. I'm on a date with a teacher and Denver resident. Today I'd like to discuss the super majority vote. What's undoubtedly necessary for this rezoning to pass. A super majority, I feel, is a tool that allows. Affluent property owners more power than less affluent property owners. So what is a super majority? Well, its very nature is, I believe, classist and racist. The voices of renters are. Completely left out. And a renters opinion isn't even taking in consideration. In this process. And because of historical injustices. Black and black. And brown residents are far less likely to be homeowners in Denver than white, affluent residents. Moreover, more than half of Denver's residents are renters. Renters outnumber homeowners, and their numbers are growing. So when a neighborhood disperses, a supermajority petition whose voices are taken into consideration. When you dig even deeper, you realize that the term neighboring property owners. Doesn't mean the amount of people. It means how big the property is that that owner. So, for example, in order to push a supermajority, you need signatures of 20% to 20% of the total land owners within 2200 feet of the property. Meaning that if I own a larger property than you. My vote matters more. So not only the supermajority not taken to the point I'm sorry. Not take into consideration the voices of renters, people who are typically younger and less affluent. It takes into entire another step and listened to the voices of large landowners more. America was founded by white landowners who gave only a vote to, shockingly enough, white landowners. The supermajority policy. Does the same. It is vile and it must end. Councilwoman Black, I applaud you for bringing this very topic to council. I'm saddened that you weren't fully supported, but I understand there was obstacles that were in the way. So I'm asking the council. Move those obstacles. End this practice once and for all. And to all of us here, I know the change. Can be frightening. But if you think change is scary, consider the status quo. We are destroying our earth for our children, and we must change our ways. One way is to reduce our carbon footprint as an entire city. We must have density in our cities and mass transit, or we will continue to destroy our earth. This year, I attended. A. Passover Seder. When we read the Haggadah. I couldn't help but think to myself what plagues, how we brought upon ourselves. We are currently running an insane experiment on our earth. Building more and more highways. Driving more single passenger cars from even farther distant neighborhoods. All because we oppose new density. In our. Cities. When will it stop? I have a three year old child. And she's precious to me. To everyone in this room who is more precious than you do. Our children do not care about the world. They will live in. Please approve this. Rezoning. Thank you. Five old. Dawn colored. My name is five Gaylord. My wife and I are 27 year residents and property owners on the west side of Denver. And before we moved here, we were building contractors for 20 years in another state. I am the Treasurer of Congregations Abraham of 132 year old congregation on the west side of Denver. And contrary to a popular rumor, I am not one of the original members is my personal opinion and my professional opinion that the proposed zoning change is extremely out of proportion and will be damaging to the adjacent neighborhood and threatening to other single family residential neighborhoods is a recognized fact, particularly in the current market, that there is a need for additional housing and that is indeed a moral imperative. But there is a conflict of moral imperatives. Operating here is also a moral imperative to address those needs in the context of orderly and esthetically compatible architecture and density and consideration of the adjacent neighborhoods. And there are long term residents. Previous discussions with the city were consistent with this principle regarding the appropriateness of, quote, a low scale multi-unit residential mixed with one and two residential uses, unquote. This is much more in-keeping and compatible with the adjacent established neighborhood spots. Owning this strip with its most difficult and limited vehicle access is really quite unnecessary in light of other vacant properties closer to the light rail, which are already zoned for higher density. It would be a very damaging precedent to rezone single family lots to a high density development. This would establish an economic pressure that will diminish the number of single family residences and increase the value of those that remain, making them even less affordable. This would seriously damage our neighborhood of large families of very modest income. Our congregation is more than 50% underpaid teachers. The large number of families surrounding Colfax Elementary School, also of very modest means, would also be threatened by setting this precedent. We would sincerely hope that the esteemed members of the City Council will review and reject this request in light of these very strong conflicts. It is our hope and expectation that you will have the best interests in mind of both the existing residents of the neighborhoods and any new residents of the proposed development who will be much more comfortable in a lower density setting with two or three bedrooms similar to the previous application that you just overwhelmingly approved. Thank you very much for hearing me out. Thank you. Next five, if you come up to the front, Ryan Keaney, Kelly Anderson, Dimitris Fortney, Aaron Wasserman and Adam Astrof and Ryan Keeney, you're up first. Join. My name's Ryan Kenney. I live at 112 on Northampton Street in Capitol Hill. I'm going to speak off the cuff today. It's late. I think my dedication to staying here, the whole council hearing, kind of speaks to my the magnitude of my support for this rezoning. I mean, it's three. Stories on an arterial. Road, and I just think it's a no brainer. So I urge you all to support. Thank you. Thank you. Kelly Anderson. I of. You can hand that when you're done. When you do 3 minutes, then you can go over our secretary inhibitor. Kayla Anderson 1655 Zenobia Street. I ask you to vote. No on the current application. Let's look beyond the typical M.E. arguments and rhetoric. And give a thought to this historic. Community that is affected by this. And also pay attention to our adopted plans, which would not be so long. If the formula. Were as simple as busy street big apartment. The new blueprint emphasizes the need for quality transitions. It designates a strip. Along Sheridan as a low, medium residential. Place type with max height of three stories, but also says the tallest building. Heights may not make sense. Where a site is providing transition and where they occur. Multi-unit buildings are low scale. On page 100, it presents an infographic that highlights a situation just like what is being proposed here as an identified problem. By definition, Main Street zoning is the. Most extreme. Build to requirements, and when applied here, it would result in a larger than normal three. Storey building. With zero setback from the shared. Alley with the Zenobia. And because of the 25 foot slope to Sheridan would result in actually four floors above ground near 17th and 50 feet in height. Even with the proposed deed restrictions. This is a low density residential neighborhood at the edge of Denver. And in this context, a block long 100 unit building is not low scale. Yes, it borders Sheridan, but throughout the area, the commercial and residential properties along Sheridan are shorter buildings. The 26 West Colfax Plan did say mainstreet zoning may be appropriate, but directed it to respect the variations inappropriate scale, ensure appropriate transitions and bulk height mass as mainstream buildings approach residential structures. If these criteria are not applicable in a situation like this, then ask when are they actually applicable? It rationalizes Main Street zoning for deeper parcels in proximity to more intense residential structures called Sheridan, a street attractive for pedestrians, bicyclists that can have on street parking that is not applicable any more shared and cannot have on street parking today. Finally, the scope and intent of Main Street zoning is is clearly not just to build an apartment with the leasing office yet that is the concept the applicant presented to the neighborhood for apartments. In this residential neighborhood, there are better conforming multi-unit residential zoning codes and the planning board agreed with that. But there is no developer here attached to this and the applicants told us they were not even entirely committed to sell the properties together. This would be granting significant extra entitlements, but with no plan for what comes next. This is an idea that members of this Council have specifically rejected in the past. During mediation, Mr. O'Donnell boasted he would get this passed without any neighborhood or R and or support if he needed to. But I stand here with the sincere hope that the City Council of Denver has higher standards and the votes to not approve this and send it back to the drawing board. It's not just a few neighbors who oppose this. It is an entire community. Of homeowners who renters, rental. Property owners and institutions alike united in their. Sorry, but your time is up, but thank you very much. Next up, Dimitri Zandvoort zawadzki so close. My name is Dimitri Xavier Romney. I live at 1950 North Logan Street and I'm here on behalf of myself as well as Yimby. Denver. I think if you've heard of arguments, I can go on about a number of them. I could talk about, you know, why dense urban housing is good for the environment, that it decreases the overall footprint, allows people to live close, sort of work closer to where they shop, make more trips on foot by bike and be close to transit, especially on a arterials such as Sheridan. But I think, you know what? What comes to mind is our housing shortage. I would rather have stood here in favor of a five storey building, and that's not happening because of compromise, you know, and I think we all have to do that. And so I'm. Here. You know, not ideal for me, but I think it's still a push in the right direction. I don't. In terms of affordability, it's a drop in the bucket. But what I think about is what happens when this doesn't get resolved, because I think inevitably these houses are going to get scraped and they're going to be replaced with 4000 square foot McMansions going for 800 K or higher. You're going to have plenty of parking and plenty of cars. You're going to have people making most of the trips that way. And the folks that could have been living there are now living 1 to 3 or four, five miles out, probably not living in Denver, you know , taking our highways or through our neighborhoods into the city to work. So I think, you know, this is kind of a microcosm of a bigger issue. But, you know, at the end of the day, we need to support even the smallest. It's in the right direction. You know, I think it could have been better, but this is what we have. And I think it's better than a bunch of single family homes along a major arterial. So thank you for your time. Thank you, Erin Wasserman. Good evening, members of Council, and thank you for your commitment and for your time. I'm Aaron Lawson, 1670s Novia Street and also president and CEO of ISSUE Veterans. Hi, I'm 53 year old institution on the west side of town. I like to voice my strong opposition of the zoning plan being proposed at 17th Avenue and Sheraton Boulevard. As the resident, there is no idea of Zenobia Street, one block east of Sheraton Boulevard. My family and I are directly affected by the proposed changes. I believe that the added density and traffic congestion and excuse me with resulting safety concerns will have a decidedly negative impact on the quality of life of our family. Furthermore, visual changes to a neighborhood are worthy of consideration as well. Our calm and peaceful neighborhood will be disrupted in Europe, irrevocably changed by a proposed zone rezoning through oppose. New changes do not take into account the historic nature of this established Denver neighborhood. I'm a longtime resident of Denver's West Side neighborhood, and I was born in neighborhood on this block, actually, and have lived there over 46 years . And a member of the Jewish community and our children have grown up down the block from their paternal grandparents. The proposed housing caters to a transient population. Given the size of units, I fear that these new housing developments will displace a stable, long standing community. As we see already, so many have been displaced and are moving away due to the size and price of housing. I fear that these new and I'm sorry the Jewish community relies on the infrastructure of religious institutions that have existed in this community for over a century. We don't have the option of just picking up and moving. While I understand that nothing stays the same, I strongly objected to gross abuses of developers who leave neighborhoods unrecognizable and overpopulation in their wake. They are not stakeholders in our community, and many of those who spoke tonight are not either. The stakeholders in our community are coming from other areas who don't really understand what not that we're against density or change, but what each piece of change, what that does to our community. Their greed and desire for more of what drives their wishes for zoning changes is what's going on. As was mentioned by Councilman Flynn earlier in the last proposal that what we need more of is larger homes, is larger apartments, three bedroom and so which has which has an idea of multi-generational. And that's not what we're seeing. We're seeing studio apartments, small apartments, which again caters to transient community and displaces the larger families and the family oriented community, which we have now. And we see many of the the Latino community that's been in a way driven out, I think, due to the pricing and the raising of homes which they've been living in at this time. I respectfully request that you consider the position of the stalwarts of the neighborhood and community and make appropriate zoning decisions accordingly. Thank you for your time. Thank you, Adam Castro. No, Adam. All right, next five. If you'd come on up. Erin Steinberg, John Rickey, Murray Darrow. Uh, Chairman Sekou and Tovah Zuckerman. Go ahead. Good evening, counsel. My name is Aaron Steinberg. Rabbi Steinberg. I'm the rabbi, a congregation, Santa Abraham, located at 1560. Wenonah, our congregation, Sarah Abraham, has been on the west side of Denver since 1887. Our community appreciates a newly adopted plan which establishes goals to preserve the authenticity of Denver's neighborhoods and celebrate our history, architecture and culture, unquote , and to, quote, embrace existing communities and their cultural assets, unquote. We are a community geographically rooted here because of our institutions. Yet, as high density development increasingly expands from Colfax Avenue into the adjacent low density residential neighborhoods, it threatens to dismantle this lovingly established century old community. When in negotiations with the applicant, we discussed a plan, an idea in which we could have the applicant work with us to meet our housing needs. It was suggested by the councilwoman who organized that meeting to consider 25 to 20% of the apartments. That would be three or four bedrooms. Meeting the need of the current community. The response by the applicant, which was termed as a compromise, was 3%, three bedroom housing. That's not compromise. That translates as one or two units of three bedrooms. That's not a compromise. That's insulting. The adopted plants identify this neighborhood as both vulnerable to displacement and lacking in the missing middle of housing options. It calls for the city to, quote, diversify housing options by exploring opportunities to integrate missing middle housing into the low and low, medium residential areas. Let me be frank. I'll skip the notes. Our community is not going to survive this. We are consistently seeing our community fall apart. Our young families are moving away. Young families which seek to move to our community. Don't they come to visit and they see they don't have a place to live? Single family homes are regularly razed and multi-unit structures are put in with one or studio one. Bedroom apartments, studio apartments. They can't live there. They move away. I ask the zoning board. Consider and please trust me on this. Consider. I'm sorry, but your time is up. Thank you. Next up, John Rickey. Good evening. My name is John Ricky. I live in a district three and a councilperson towards this district. Thank you very much for having me. Sorry if I'm a bit punchy. It's been an evening and I. As it happens with most people, I think I started paying attention housing when I bought a house. I started paying attention in the streets at the same time. You know, how do you get in between the houses and the places you want to go? I became passionate about cities and how they work. This rezoning that's being requested at the up to 2 to 3 stories of Main Street, I believe, is a really good idea . I urge you to vote for it. 2 to 3 stories. Main Street zoning is the most pedestrian friendly we have. If you're going to try to encourage mode shift, this is the way to do it. Forcing more parking into it isn't the right way to do it. But like was said earlier, compromise. I know it's difficult for people to imagine that cars aren't necessary to get things done, but when you live across the street from a park and a grocery store and hardware store and a home goods store and a beer store. Heck, I don't. I wouldn't. You don't even need a bike at that point. You can just walk across there and get everything that you need. The the the the I mentioned the way cities work. 86% of Denver is dedicated to single unit residential. And that form of zoning requires well, it doesn't require, but it makes it really difficult to live without a car. And that's too much of our city to try to force people into cars. There's no more room on the streets if we are to get the mode shift we need, we need the density to support the transit . It helps that this particular rezoning is along. Sheridan and two blocks off of Colfax are the main Premiere. I consider a transit way and hopefully will be upgraded one day, but we have to be able to to to have the population to support that transit. I find it curious. The last speaker said that he wants young families to move into the neighborhood, but you have to have a place to move them into and there are no more single family houses being built there. You can't, you can you can only replace them. So if you want a place for young families to be, you have to have units for them to move into. Not to mention that, you know, couples and singles and transients need housing, too. And we keep falling further and further behind. Every year in Denver, more people move here, and we still aren't building enough housing in order to house everyone. And we need to do something about that. We keep trying to scrunch it all down into a smaller space as we can, and you can see what it's done to, you know, the city and everyone's really great attitudes. Thank you very much. I apologize for rambling. Have a good night. Thank you. Next up, Marie Durrow. Good evening. My name is Maureen Darrow. I live in an apartment on the 1500 block of Xavier Street in Denver. I'm here today to express my opposition to the rezoning of the properties located on the 600 block of Sheridan Boulevard. Denver has worked hard to put into place various plans for redevelopment in order to meet the demands of a rapidly growing population. Within these plans, one focus mentioned is equity. Our society today spends a lot of time talking about inclusion and diversity and protecting minority or at risk segments of the society. I would ask the Council to take into account one such minority community located in the West Colfax neighborhood where the proposed rezoning would take place. The West Denver Jewish community is made up of over 100 households, all within a geographic area of a mere half square mile. The cultural practices within this community include active involvement in the various organizations belonging to this segment of the population, including multiple daily services and classes, the local synagogue, ongoing classes and services at the Adult Learning Center, two active high schools that draw students from around the globe and many others. There's a prohibition of driving on the weekly Sabbath and holidays, which prevents this community from being able to look at housing options outside of this small geographic area. There is much infrastructure in place for this community, which has been active in West Denver since the 1880s, along with the needs of housing close to these Jewish community centers . The housing needs of this population requires larger units than the average requirement of the surrounding area, although the average household size in this zip code is 2.9 persons. Over 11% of the households in this area are made up of six or more persons. With these larger household sizes being average within the Jewish community. Because of the intergenerational focus of this community. Many children desire to remain in the neighborhood near their parents when moving out and starting families of their own. However, these families need more than a studio one better two bedroom apartments in order to remain long term. Despite this need, less than 1% of units in this neighborhood are larger than two bedrooms with the proposed units. If the rezoning goes through, allowing for a mere 3% of units to be three bedroom. This ignores the needs of this minority population while adding to the traffic congestion and lack of parking that already characterizes this section of the neighborhood. The concern with this rezoning is not only the houses that would be torn down, but the precedent that would be set allowing other low density housing needed by this minority population to be resold and replaced with high density housing. I'm a single woman and currently rent an apartment two blocks from the properties under discussion. I have rented in over a dozen neighborhoods in the Denver area in the course of my adult life and can testify to the unique nature of this neighborhood. In addition, my family has been in Denver for over 100 years, so I have a vested interest in seeing this neighborhood retain its character and to make sure that I. Heard that your time is up. Thank you. I don't see Chairman Sekou. All right, Tovah Zuckerman. And then I'll call the next five. Okay. Next last three. Dan Schorr, Jesse Paris and Daniel Krauss, if you want to come up to the front. Good. Good evening. My name is Tova Sussman. I'm here to speak as a member of the Orthodox Jewish community of West Colfax. Several members of my community are here and many more would be here, but have been busy with their families or evening prayer and study sessions. It's hard for me to be here too, and I thank my daughter for putting her younger siblings to bed. Our community is a unique one. We live in a geographically small neighborhood because of the infrastructure that's been in place for a very, very long time. We do not drive or ride in any vehicles on the Sabbath each week, so we need to be within walking distance of the synagogue and other Sabbath observant families for our children to play with my husband and I. But our home on Tennyson Street two years ago, it was very hard to find because the prices have gone up so much over the years and there are so few houses available for sale. I have many friends who would like to be able to buy homes but have been unable to do so because of the prices and limited housing stock. Some of my friends have moved away because of the housing situation. We are not a wealthy community. We are interested in living in single family homes in order to have space for our families. My husband and I have a relatively small family of four children. Some of my families, some of my friends who have managed to buy homes in the area have eight or nine children. We need the arts for kids to play in and streets that are not overly full of heavy traffic and will be safe for children to cross. Apartments do not work for us. I have heard that building more smaller units will make the price per square foot in the neighborhood even higher, causing the prices of homes to go even higher. Rezoning single family homes for apartments will cause. A number of single family homes to go even lower. I am very proud to be living in the neighborhood where my husband's great grandparents and grandparents lived. If rezoning in our neighborhood continues as a trend, our community will be displaced. In conclusion, I opposed the rezoning of the properties on Sheridan Boulevard. Please protect our community. Thank you. Thank you. Dan Schorr. Hi, I'm Dan from the West Colfax Business Improvement District. So I'm here for the West Colfax bid. And we we did vote the board voted to support this rezoning. You know, largely for the reasons that it's you know, it's it's within plan precedent, you know, well, within a blueprint, it supports more intense development on arterial. And main streets. And it really works toward completing a complete. Street network that we're is is painfully absent, particularly in this location with no sidewalk. And we're also afraid about the lack of of attainable housing, especially as you've heard about this neighborhood. Gentrifying does not, you know, is dwindling. And this would, you know, at least provide some opportunity for some of that stock to come back. And then, of course, we're a business improvement district. And we believe that building a vital pedestrian connection and creating a broader network of infrastructure. To serve, that. The entire community, commuters, everybody who's living and walking and shopping is really beneficial and not just for the business community, but really for everybody in the community. And in fact, you know, many of the speakers here opposed tonight are very much you know, we've been working on making Colfax a safer place to walk across and beyond. And of course, that's something that a lot of people here, even opponents of this rezoning also are seeking. So there's a lot there is some commonality there. I think that what we are seeing tonight is that change is difficult. And unfortunately, I think that sounds like there was an effort to make this housing, this potential site, a this site a potential place for the Jewish community, you know, to accommodate the Jewish community by, you know, housing them there. And that didn't work, unfortunately. And so I think that it's a difficult thing. And then we're seeing that actually broadly in the city, that change is difficult. There's a lot of tension about development and housing. This is an example of one where there's not a developer, which is kind of unusual. And but what I come back to is that on this in this location on Sheridan Boulevard, and some people have already referenced this, it's a somebody mentioned it to you did. So, you know, it's just a very it's not an easy site to to develop and build on. And so I just don't think that there is a realistic solution. To this. That involves townhouses, which would really be the option. So anyway, for all of those reasons, I do want to see something happen here and. You know, take your time. Thank you. I don't see Jesse Perez. All right. Daniel Krauss. Hi, my name is Daniel Prowse and I need to first say I'm here on personal business as a neighbor. I'm also senior architect for in CPD in the building side, not in the planning or the zoning side, but I live at 1339 Range Street and they also my parents have a home just as a direct neighbor to the property. And I was there for at some of the meetings, mostly observing in the in the mediation. I have to say that that did not include the community that was for neighbors directly, you know, the ones who petitioned, I guess, in protest formally. But the community concerns are legitimate. There is a very different dynamic and you're hearing about it. There are people ready to buy families, ready to buy homes. I can tell you very specific examples of, for example, a couple with a woman with multiples with M.S. and they want to buy a cross from the synagogue. And the home was advertised as a red brick Tudor with the original fireplace and wood floors, etc., and it was being marketed for a family to move into as a, you know, a number of bedroom home. Like it's typical in the neighborhood. There was typical in the neighborhood. And because of the four plex zoning, which was not intended, that was the duplex zoning that went awry that people were building these four plex. And largest concentration, as far as I know, is in the West Colfax neighborhood. And those are displacing actual housing. In this case, that was an offer well beyond the expectation of the of the seller. And they're like, well, wow, a developer wants to buy this will raise you know, they'll raise the house and put four small vertical units. Of course, someone is not going to live in a vertical unit like that and our families are not going to be able to live in homes that don't have the yards, don't have the bedrooms. And really, sustainability comes to mind because I'm very, very involved in green building and in the committee member for the adoption of the sustainable building codes. Now it's going to 20 into 2019 and the sustainability and the cost of new housing. When you're going to raise existing housing and build new, they're going to be more expensive and it's driving up the per square foot, even the cost of the existing housing stock, which is very limited in a very small area . But it's certainly something that could be avoided if the it was appropriate, things were appropriately zoned. And I do think that the blueprint, Denver, the actual zoning and the new comp plan get it right and they don't call for a 50 foot building an m a main street building which doesn't respect the alley the same way there's there's issues with this trust. You know, there are issues. What I suggest is there's a neighborhood planning effort going on for West Denver and it's starting October 5th. If I could please implore. The I'm sorry, but your time is up. To wait and have this thinking adjudicated as part of the neighborhood plan. I think it would be appropriate. All right. That concludes our speakers. Are there any questions from members of Council Councilman Hines? Thank you, Mr. President. May I speak with someone from the Jewish community? I don't know exactly who to call, but if you could select someone. Awesome. Thank you. And I'm sorry, could you could you mention your name again? Daniel Krauss. Krauss, yes. All right. Thank you, Mr. Krauss, for your service to the city. Also, thank you for for coming here. Also, thank thank you. The Jewish community for for coming. I'm glad that we could do this on a time other than between Friday and Saturday night on Sunday on what is an era of. The Arab is a boundary that allows people to either carry things or example to push a stroller on the Sabbath. So within the air of a family could travel to synagogue with their children as opposed to without. Is an air of something that's recognized by the city. Like an ordinance. There's a declaration by the mayor for a declaration. What about an ordinance? Mr. Goulart could speak to that. Okay. Five of Gallard. I've had the merit of managing the area for the last 25 years. The the city council's 25 years ago under the mayor, Webb passed a resolution that recognized the need for the Jewish community to build an enclosure, according to Jewish law, without infringing on anybody else's rights that would allow us to carry on the Sabbath. There are 39 classifications of work that we don't do on the Sabbath. I won't name the other 38, but one of them is carrying in the public domain. And so we have inspectors that go around every Thursday to see that the integrity is there and make sure that people can carry food to the sick, carry their children, push a stroller, keep the keys to their house in their pocket, carry their prayer book to synagogue, etc., etc.. Okay. Is this an it's error of. Error of. A roof. Okay. And most Jewish communities through the centuries have such a construction. Okay. Is this the only eruv in Denver? No, it is not. There's one on the east side. There's one on the on the southeast. And I believe the current community has recently also constructed one. Is this recognized as a historic area or a historic district? That's not my department, but I don't think so. Okay. As the city allowed you to use utility poles to demarcate the era. We had to. It was an arduous process. The legal process probably took a year or a year and a half, and all of the utilities had to sign off and approve our use. Even the water department had to sign off and they were underground. But yes, we do indeed either use the utility poles with their existing infrastructure or we are allowed to. As long as they are in the low voltage area, we are allowed to attach to the utility poles. And who's Golda meir? Who is. Golda meir? Golda meir. Meir, excuse me. Yes. She was the prime minister of Israel years ago, the first female. She lived in Denver. And her house, I believe, is a little historic edifice someplace on the west side. Was it part of this area, this era or no? Well, I don't know if it was in the era of there was no Arabs when she was here, but the Jewish community was. There were 2000 families at one time, and it has since. And 13 synagogues, I believe 20 synagogues. It has since shrunk. We are the only synagogue left. The oldest one, I think, west of Chicago. The only synagogue left west of Chicago. Left on the west side is congregations there. Abraham There used to be 20. Okay. And I apologize. I'm I'm learning quickly tonight, one of my aides speaks Hebrew and and is an American. But. But it was educating me when I was looking at my phone. I apologize. She can't be here physically. She was physically present earlier, but was trying to learn as much as I could as quickly as I could. And I. I might have more questions in a minute. So I appreciate your interest. I don't know. But, you know, I hope I was able to answer your question satisfactorily. Yes, of course. I mean, I guess where I'm going with the line of questions is if this is a distinct area and it and and to preserve the air of this this new building might destroy the era of I'm that's where I'm trying to go with this. You know. I the average certainly runs up to that that alley. But we're we're very used to being having to respond to changes all the construction goes on. I worked with RTD for, I don't know, 15 years as they changed things around as there are pull hits or people take fences up and down. So there's a reason I have to inspect this go around every week because we need to respond to change in that regard. Yeah. So. When we consider zoning requests, we as a city council, we have to follow a very narrow set of guidelines, but conformity with existing plans is one of them, and equity is the first metric in both blueprint and comp plan 2040. And so that's kind of my thought process. But I'll yield to Madame Vice President or President Pro Tem. Thank you. Well, we do indeed have a vested interest that goes back over a century in the neighborhood. Historically, financially, educationally. And the area was just really one one aspect of that. And the very admirable concern you had for the Latino population in the last and that minority. We would hope that you would look upon our needs in the same, you know, in the same light. Thank you for your consideration. All right. Thank you. Councilman Hines, Councilman Sawyer. Thank you. Teresa, can I just ask you a couple of questions about the surrounding area? And so in your first couple of pages, as you're coming up, you mention in your staff report 44 letters of opposition. I'm sorry, didn't you mentioned. In your staff report 44 letters of opposition? It's on the page. Hang on. Well, I'm looking at looking puzzled because I thought it was while there were. I'm sorry. 46 total letters. One was an R.A.. One was in support. So I guess that's 44. Yes. Yes. 44 letters of opposition. And you sort of glossed over that and had said, hang on, let me just pull it up really quickly. Sorry. So it was it's nine. Slide nine. One letter of support, 44 letters of opposition. And then when when you were going through this slide, you just sort of glossed over it and said that those didn't count any more or there was something that had gone on around the mediation attempt. Can you explain? Kind of. So those 44 letters of opposition are are intact in your staff. They're in the staff report. And those ones that are in there are intact. Okay, great. And then can we talk a little bit about the surrounding area and what sorts of transit options exist and what sorts of transit options are planned for that area ? You want to. Yeah. Go back to existing land use or. Yeah. I guess. Or maybe this is a question for someone from Public Works that I'm just sort of trying to figure out as I look at the maps what the and I look at Google Earth, what the actual transit options are that are there because to me, it sort of looks like there's Sheridan Boulevard where there are cars and there's 17th Avenue where there are cars. Um, 17th avenue where there are cars and bus and bus. They're shared an avenue where there are cars and bus lines. There are two complex avenue where there are several busses. Well, right now it's like seven, several blocks down. So I'm just looking at the immediately surrounding area. Okay. So there's a bus line on 17th and there's, as I recall, and somebody checked me, I thought there were at least three bus lines on Sheridan. And are those planned upgrades? Are there are there planned upgrades? Is that a high capacity corridor that's going to give. It in a high capacity corridor? Okay. And it's one of the ones that's planned eventually to be built out to something else. Do we know? I. Not to my knowledge, but it is a high capacity corridor and those are the ones we try and emphasize adding transit to. So it would not surprise me. Okay. And then without a is it typical to do a rezoning like this without a builder and without some sort of plan? Yes. We're only talking about an entitlement at this stage, so. Okay. I guess I'm a little confused because it was mentioned several times that it wasn't typical for this to happen without some sort of discussion of pulling out of a planning stage as well. So can you clarify that a little? Well, yes. Staff is looking at this from the perspective of the entitlement. A lot of times the builder or the property owner is looking at it and what they might propose to build. And sometimes that feels like a disconnect, I guess. Yeah. Because I guess, you know, as we're talking about equity issues and we're talking about a very specific community of people who are looking for a very specific thing and have very specific needs, for example, to have separate countertops, to separate refrigerators, to separate dishwashers, to separate. Right. If you're keeping kosher, you have to have completely separate cooking areas and prepping areas in your kitchen, which makes design and layout of something like a home, an incredibly intricate and different process that is very specific and has very specific requirements and very specific needs. So it's it's very hard to have that conversation when there is no builder or design at all, I guess, and. Maybe that's a better question for Bruce, but because I was not in on the discussions of what exactly was being built. All I know is apartment and I don't even know the number of units. Okay. Sorry. No further questions then. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman Black. Thank you, Mr. President. I have a question for you, Bruce O'Donnell, please. So we've we've talked about letters of opposition, and then one of the applicants had a petition of people who are in support. So can you tell us about some of the support that you've had in the community? I don't feel that people from the community who are in support of it came tonight. Sure, I'd be interested in hearing about. Letters of support that are from that community as well as who signed that petition. So we in have furnished in our in the official record and in your packets 12, I think it is additional letters of support from neighboring property owners. Two of them are from well, actually five of them I guess are from property owners within 200 feet who could have signed the protest petition but instead signed letters of support . So they're in the immediate you know, they would be classified certainly in the immediate neighbor vicinity. And then the over the last weekend and I was not involved. You could ask Rick Lane, who kind of headed up the effort and one of the applicant property owners, but went to in the neighborhood over the weekend and gathered 102 signatures in favor of the rezoning proposal. Mr. Lane, would you mind coming up and telling us more about the petition, the signatures you got on that? Yes, please. Well, we just wanted to find out what the interest was. With petitions to see how much support we could get. I was quite was quite surprised that we got a lot of support basically over the. I think we started on the 12th and we went through the 15th and most of those were I was obtained on the 15th. And we just simply asked people if they would support that. You know, we would support the rezoning of the low to medium density that we wanted to put on there. And we got a lot of response. A lot of people signed it. So. And did you go door to door? No, actually, what we for the. Well we did for some. Yeah, we started doing that and but Sunday there was a bazaar that was on Raleigh and there was a lot of people walking around. So we just stood in one spot and as people would walk by, we would ask them if they would like to support us . And they would they would ask us questions. We answered the question questions. And we've got we got 102 signatures as a result of it. Okay. Thank you. And do you live in one of these houses? Yes. The corner house on 17th and Sheridan. And are there are five houses or are. It's hard to. There. There there are four. Houses were houses and ah. Do you all occupy those houses. No. Who do. Okay. So before you sit down, so we've heard a lot from people in the neighborhood just east of this row of houses who it seems like everyone is part of the Jewish community. Are any of you. Part of that Jewish community? No, ma'am. Okay. Thank you. Fine. Thanks. Thank you. Councilwoman Black. Councilwoman Torres. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Hi, Mr. Darnell. Just a quick clarifying question. If there's no development or plan slated for this, can you clarify why? I've heard a couple folks talk about 3% affordable or some more specific language. Sure. So it is correct that there's no developer. There's no development plan. There's no architect. There's no project in in my experience doing this work in Denver for about the last 25 years, that's actually quite common. And I've I've done a lot of that type of work throughout the city. And so we've, as you've heard, spent over a year in community engagement and public outreach and mediation, working with a number of people that are here tonight. And we kept trying to craft restrictions and limitations and requirements into our proposal that in an effort to see if we could find come up with a compromise or a solution that would be acceptable to the neighboring community. And so that was unsuccessful, although the the commitments that we've said we would honor, we've lived up to by recording a covenant in a deed restriction against the property about a week ago now. And so, for example, there is a requirement in there and it runs with the land that 3% of residential units be three bedroom, and that that is one of the requirements in the covenant. And it's in direct response to the input we got from the community in, in all of the components of the covenant collectively are our attempt to respond to the input we've received over the course of the last year in why that is good is that if when this property if and when it is purchased by a developer, they will inherit these obligations. And and so the, the that portion of the community input that we were responsive to will be inherited by them. And in in they'll have to live with it. And the the covenant only covers. Three bedroom layout. It doesn't cover price point or correct it. It covers a number of other topics. More on the development standard than the use standard side, but one of which is the three bedrooms. It also addresses height and parking and the number of buildings in the use of rooftops and all these many topics that we heard over the course of the last year or so. Okay. Thank you. Yes. Thank you, Councilwoman Councilman Cashman. Thank you, Bruce. If you'd stay up there along those same lines, we also I think I heard something about 100 units or so. So the application councilman is for Main Street zoning. And so there as I have said, there isn't a plan, there isn't a developer. It could be mixed use. It could be all commercial. It could be all residential. No one knows today. It is because of its location. It's likely. And what we've talked a lot about over the last year or more, it's likely that it is a multifamily site, perhaps with ground floor activation as is required in Main Street in if it is multifamily. Our estimate is that this site in two buildings would support somewhere in the 80 to 100 units perhaps. Okay. Do you have any comment or about concerns over access and egress from the site? Yes. So it most likely will be Allie served. Sheridan is a state highway and with limited access and then within the block to Zenobia there is limited space. And so one thing that was this was talked about quite a lot over the last many, many months or a year. One thing that's true is that none of the Zenobia houses take vehicular access from the alley. They all have front yard. Zenobia facing or any place facing driveways and garages. And so the alley today is used only for trash and recycling and utility type services. And so, as I think we're aware on zoning situation, the access and those types of issues are not part of the zoning. They're addressed by public works at the time of site plan, but that it's it's likely that it's very reliant on the alley. Thank you. Yes, Theresa. One question for you. Is this neighborhood going to. Can I correct one thing? Mr. O'Donnell said the zoning requires alley access if there's an alley. Okay. Thank you. Is this neighborhood part of the NPI initiative? It is. And when would you expect that to start? It's already started. They're already in the midst of it. The first meeting I think, was last week. The steering committee. The steering committee is. That's right. Sorry. Okay. Thank you, Teresa. That's all right. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilman Cashman. Councilwoman Ortega. Thank you, Mr. President. So, Bruce, would you mind coming back up to the microphone? So did I hear that there was mediation on this site? Yes. The city engaged Steve Charbonneau company to do mediation. And we had a over a period of many months, a number of meetings and back and forth. And so who were the community players that were involved in that mediation? I'm assuming this looks like the neighborhood group was at the table, but were some of these immediate neighbors? Yes. The Jewish community part of that? Yes. There's a number of people here this evening that have spoke that we worked with throughout that time. Okay. You mentioned that over the last 25 years that you've been involved in doing the zoning changes that it's common to rezone without a site plan. Yes. That's only been happening since 2010 because prior to that, the the requirement and expectations of this body were looking at details of what came before. Wasn't just a zoning without plans for what was going to go on the site. Well, I respectfully in my experience, I disagree respectfully. I reasoned the 80 acres at the Gates site in 2004 and five with a. Robust planning process as part of that rezoning. It wasn't just a blanket rezoning without having some some clear. It also included, you know, discussions about obligations from that development to the community. That's all of. That. That's all true on the east side, on what was Cherokee. But I was on the west side. But anyway, I like to argue. But but ivory's on a lot of property in Denver with no no developer. And in fact, it's interesting it in particular a planning board today that for the past many years we're not allowed to talk about the specifics of a project or show design or anything like that, because zoning is all about is this zone district appropriate at this address? Well, some of us are hoping to change some of that so they don't. Play by that rulebook when it happens. Understanding of what specifically we're being asked to approve, besides just looking at scale without seeing the details. And, you know, this has come to light with the 41st and Fox area. Councilwoman and we. Dressing those. Yeah we could get going on that discussion for a long time and the hours late, so maybe we could focus on this one. Let me call up Rabbi Wasserman, if you wouldn't mind, if you're still here. Do I remember correctly that as part of the Sloan's Lake redevelopment, that the school at the corner of Colfax and Perry was replaced with housing that DHS is doing? That was part of the Jewish school. And I don't remember if it was a land swap or but that in exchange provided some resources for the school to do additional improvements. So that was it? Yeah, that was our dormitory, which was four blocks away from the school, which is on Stuart. And the idea was to create a contiguous campus and to have a were a boarding school to create, to build a dormitory on site. So we had sold that property to. And what is the location of where the dormitory was built? Councilwoman, if they would stick to this. It's all part of the same neighborhood. So that's why I'm asking. A new dormitory? Yes, a new dormitory is. And it is 1555 Stuart Street, right across from the Saint Anthony parking lot. Great. Okay. So that's within this same geographical area. Okay. Thank you. I just needed clarification on that. Can you just. I'm sorry. One quick question. What was the the scale of that? Is that a two story building? One story building? Two story building. Okay. And we had to fight hard, so. All right. Let me see. I think I had one last question. No. I think I've covered them all. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman Cannick. Thank you, Mr. President. I was curious about Main Street zoning. I was looking. Theresa, this is probably for you. But, Bruce, stay close. I see that there's no comment from transportation. I'm really familiar with this area. I used to live not too far away. And I'm just curious about the practicality. If street activation is required, this is a. Tough. Couple of blocks. Like I've seen the strollers in Sheridan and the wheelchairs in Sheridan. And so I guess I understand we don't do site review, but at a certain level it would be very bizarre to be doing Main Street zoning in a place where it might physically be impossible to comply. So I'm just a little concerned about that. And that's I think this is probably a Bruce question because he's been the one in discussions with transportation. But my understanding is that there is discussion with transportation of dedicating 16 feet for a detached sidewalk on Sheridan. Yeah. Okay, Bruce, if you want to come up, I guess a sidewalk only gets you across the site. It doesn't guarantee that anyone's going to use an activated space. I just, you know, I can't imagine personally myself walking and going to a shop or a a restaurant in this particular block of shirt and even with a sidewalk . Right. The only people I've ever seen are people getting to the park or the bus stop. It's not a destination. So Main Street, to me, we're having a lot of conversation about density. I'm I'm not sure we have the right sound district, so that's what I'm trying to understand. Sure. Thank you, Councilman. So we have there's been a lot of talk over a long time about improvements in the shared and right of way. And so Theresa mentioned to the sidewalk when when Councilman Espinosa was involved, he started an effort to see if as tied to the actual zoning, if 16 feet of right away could be dedicated to Sheridan because he thought there might be some bond money available that a sidewalk, a detached sidewalk in a tree line could be done immediately. And we agreed that we would pursue that. And then it just for a whole variety of reasons, it never panned out. We we tried to work with the real estate department and also with public works. And so the the only real assurance of a detached sidewalk and tree line today would be just through the rezoning and through the development review and permitting process. The in regards to activated use and the in you're more concerns in the building. I agree with you that this is a difficult site there and we actually explored a whole variety of zone districts. We've inquired about a desire to do a Pudi. We looked at Enmu, we looked at our ECS and CPD insisted all along that it be Main Street because of Sheridan being an arterial, a mixed use arterial pardon me. And also because of in particular the West Colfax plan. And so the inn so we've we kind of got boxed in the main street and we'll have to figure out how to make that work. During the development or implementation down the road. Okay. So CBD, Theresa or if you can please come back up, can you please explain to me since you since it sounds like it was the department that insisted on this zone district, I get the idea of like a generic arterial and a generic location, but this actual site has an actual slope. Even with a sidewalk, it's not a pleasant place to be on that side of it. And I'm just so sorry. I don't recall us saying this has to be Main Street. I think that when we did the prep, it was a mixed use or Main Street. There was a lot of discussion with the council office, so it was sort of a pick, one of these kind of thing. Okay. I guess the next question then for the applicants, so thank you is again, I understand we don't have a site plan, but we're having a very big late debate involving your whole community. And I'm not sure that what you're describing as what the zone district allows you to do is feasible. So can you explain to me how it is that you are assured that you can fulfill this zone district? First of all, in terms of the Main Street and activation and secondly, why you set certain thresholds for what you could and couldn't agree to in, for example, like the three bedrooms, right. Why? Why if you don't have someone testing the economics of this, why not? I mean, why who who is advising in terms of what the applicant. SA agreeing to or not agreeing to in the good neighbor agreement. So we've that's been a big part of my role certainly. And then the I've worked closely with the applicant on all of that. And so, for example, with the three bedroom question, when this came up about a month ago, three weeks ago or so, we started researching it and looking into it and gathering a lot of data and information. And it I've learned through this information gathering that in the West Colfax and Sloan's Lake area and also in the downtown LoDo, Central Platte Valley, kind of Reno area, since 2014, about 12,000 apartment units have been built and about 120 of those are three bedroom. So it's it's just a here under 1%. And in we learned a lot of market factors and market reasons of why that's the case. But we also heard that the community was interested in three bedroom units. And so we've talked about it and determined that doing three times what the market delivers is a step in the right direction on that. And and so there's, you know, real data and information backing that up. There wasn't any feasibility in this site. There wasn't any testing of the economics or the design on this site. Correct. Okay. My last question. I guess maybe, you know, Daniel Kraus or if you prefer, the rabbi or someone else. You've posed an alternative, and I have to focus on the criteria, so I'm going to focus on the criteria. But you've proposed an alternative that we should not rezone this, which implies that if we did not rezone it, there would be housing opportunities for the community, right? That we're foreclosing opportunities if we do this. But I'm not. I guess I need to understand why you think not rezoning it would somehow result in something better for this community. What what evidence or analysis have you put into the fact that if this doesn't get resolved, it would in fact, provide the type of housing that you're you're curious. I very much appreciate that specific question because I was involved in Blueprint Denver as a citizen at the time, and there was concern about the community. And there was very targeted, specific areas of change identified along West Colfax, which everyone wanted it to be, become less blighted. And there was a transportation transit corridor at the gulch that would receive light rail that needed to change. And there was also the Saint Anthony redevelopment. So there was a very careful surgical, almost like saying, okay, this is what we want to preserve, because if we give increased entitlement to the single or duplex zones, we're going to essentially what we've seen already with the four plex, which was a mistake. But we're going to have homes razed literally the homes that we've lived in and people leave the community because eventually people do move around. And when they do, for whatever reason, they're selling to a developer to demolish a house that was lived in for 30 years. That is perfectly can continue to be that. And we have very limited housing stock. So I do think that anything that encourages a developer to say instead of us paying market at Colfax because these lots are available on Colfax, we're seeing lots of these single I mean, that's what Mr. Sherman they were saying is that we're seeing 12,000 units, of which only 1% are what we need. Right? So we're seeing mostly what we don't need. And that is going up all around us. And it's been going up where it's intended by the zoning plan. And that is correct. And all we're asking is to not infringe and not invite people to look and say, well, I can offer less than market to people who can only sell for low density. And I'll tell them no, they can sell for more because we'll go to council. I feel very strongly that a neighborhood plan is on the docket. We should use that to do this through the city, not through this process, because this process has already undermined the community, just literally. It's not a risk that people have talked about. We're looking at, you know, a potential threat. No, this has happened. We have lost housing. And I must say that people who've come to me and asked, can I look in the zoning department whether they can use an established basement unit to rent so they can buy a home and they can have some income? They're being told, no, it's single family zoning. You can't. And that already has the kitchen already has access from the outside. They're being told they can't put up an Adu. So we would thrive from increased density. We could put 100 units in this neighborhood in an appropriate way easily just where it's intended through the correct process. Okay. One last question, Mr. President. So, Teresa, can you come back up, please? So can you just clarify for me the current zoned district, this is something I was CPD, by the way, would just do for every zoning, but just tell me what can be built currently. And then you mentioned the mixed use zone district. IMU was the alternative if they didn't go with the MZ, is that right? So I would just like a very high level brief summary of what else could be built on the properties in question under their current zoning and what can be built under means. I'm actually did I not do a comparison in your staff report some of the different zone districts and. Well I see what the surrounding zone districts but. Okay I'm just not sure because. I have the options two and three summary of Zoning Request. If you let me know where to look, I can certainly go there. Slide six, I'm. Oh, I'm in the staff report. Oh, sorry. Let me get my staff report. All right. So it's the site is us you see to and you are three a single in two unit residential. I just don't know exactly if you us we've got to we've got four parcels though so I don't, I don't. Yes. I'm just like if you were to say to me we have four parcels with four residences now under the current zoning we could get eight, you know, let me know that. Like that's where I'm trying to get bottom line. Sorry. Well, so the US you see two is single unit build an urban house two and a half storeys or 30 feet because that two is on there. The C two, you can also build an Adu, a duplex, a tandem house on corners where at least one of the streets is a collector or arterial. So on Sheridan Corner, 17th Avenue Corner, you have that ability to build that 82 duplex tandem house. So bump up your density slightly with that you as you see two. Okay. Okay. I so yeah, we're we're we're neck and it's late. I just literally want to know, are the four homes that are there now if we maxed out the current zoning, we could end up with eight. We could end up with six. Counting Adus. I don't care about height right now. I'm just hoping you could do two at the corner there at 17th Avenue. You could actually do two at the other corner at any place there's already one of the properties is already a duplex, so that's six already. Okay. And then so the seventh one you do seven houses, a single unit. But then the actually I'm sorry because they let me get to this. I'm looking, I need to look at the existing zoning. So. It is. The two properties at the end are this row house. Yes. Okay. So for the row house, though, you have the ability to build more because you can build row house, duplex, tandem house. You've got a variety of things you can build there. Okay. And then there was a little dispute about who insisted on Main Street or whether it was a choice. There was a lot of discussion between the council office, the planning office and the applicant. And as I recall, there was discussion about the context. There was discussion about the zoned districts. And we probably want to sort all that out. So just between so there's the existing zone district and there's the main street that could end up with the apartment form and the 8200 units in between is the other zone district you mentioned that they could have gone to. Can you just say what that is again? Mixed use. Right? You ask just can you give me the whole mix if. Well, again, you. M. X x. Okay. You could choose three five. Okay. So and then just let's just say it was the three. If it was a you x three for the whole, the whole set of parcels, what would be the potential number of units that in that zone district we'd be talking about. I hate that question. I know cos. I don't know unless I know how it's being parked. Is it parked in a garage or is it being parked on the surface. Okay. Because surface parking takes up so much space, it really limits the amount of units you can build. Okay. And garage, if it's underground, I mean, it lets you build a lot more at the surface. So that's why I really hate that question. Mr. President, I know that I am going for a long time, but this really is trying to figure out the criteria for my vote. So one last question to Mr. O'Donnell, please. You shared at one point that you saw it or someone shared me. It might have been an applicant that the only thing folks would have been happy with is townhomes. Can you speak to why the applicants were not willing to pursue a different zoned district that was more of a townhome type approach rather than the apartment type approach? Well, the you know, the the South and the very south end of the block is already zoned for row homes. And in so the there was in I'm not trying to argue with trees or anything, but there was very strong direction from CPD to pursue Main Street. And so we got into that in in got locked into Main Street because of the plan support in the in the all of that and the the real desire of the applicant is to has been to prepare their property to be able to implement blueprint recommendations in in. So we've been through this long kind of arduous path with mediation and on and on, and we've tried to craft it with the covenant and the deed restriction to be more sensitive to the immediate neighbors and the community given kind of the tool kit we were able to work with. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Councilwoman Kels on black. Thank you, Mr. President. I have a quick question. I think for you, Mr. Goulard. I think that's your name. So I'm very carefully listening to everyone's concerns and I feel like what I'm hearing is that there's concern that there's not enough housing for future generations. And so I'm. Curious. These four houses are not currently occupied by by people from your group. So can you explain to me how disallowing. New development there. Changes the housing options for the people. Who live in the community? Well, I think I the concern I vocalized was that the rezoning sets a precedent to be able to rezone single family zoning. I'm not familiar with all the code words and and and letters, anagrams, wherever they are. And that will make residential property therefore more valuable for raising and rebuilding and requesting similar zoning within the neighborhood. And then more single family residences will evaporate from the marketplace. So, I mean, I remember a family that came here that lived in five basements before they could find a house to rent. And and there are property owners in the community who rent below market to be able to attract young people to stay here. So I think the logic is that if we don't oppose this rezoning, we set a precedent that will spread just because of the economic incentive to other residential areas, which would be harmful to us and would also be harmful to other people of modest means who are not part of the Jewish community. And my answering the question. Yes, yes, you are. And so I know it's just one question, but Teresa, if you could answer a follow up question. So thank you very much. So thank you. Mr. Aguilar is concerned that this would set a precedent for a rezoning into the neighborhood. But is is there. Plan support for rezoning those single family. Homes to the east of Sheridan? Well, I guess I'm a bit puzzled by that, because the reason we're supporting Main Street on on Sheridan is because it's it meets the criteria. It's an arterials street. The Main Street zoning talks about being on that sort of a linear situation like that. So I don't think that we'd support going into the residential with Main Street because Zenobia is not a Main Street. We would we consider that the whole point of blueprint is that our arterial streets are where we push the density. We wouldn't push it to a zenobia street. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Black. All right. Seeing no other questions, the public hearing for Councilman 577 is closed. Are there comments by members of council? Councilwoman Sandoval, this one is in your district. Did you want to go first? Sorry, I. Go ahead. Thank you, Mr. President. Sorry, I was looking over some notes. So I just want to say that. I don't like sitting here tonight at 1145, having neighbors who I represent pitted against each other. It doesn't feel right. It's really unfortunate. And I remember when this application came in. And I'm going to counter what CPD said. Councilman Espinosa wanted the sidewalks dedicated, and he would have done anything possible to have those sidewalks dedicated. I don't think any person in this room can say different. He made that known throughout his whole campaign. He made it known everywhere. And so that's what Councilman Espinosa wanted. That was his will. And so if that meant it was Main Street, that meant it was Main Street. Now, in my councilman Espinosa. No, I am not. So when this came to our office, I saw the writing on the wall because it was actually a five story rezoning application and blueprint. Denver was going on the updated blueprint Denver. And we were working robustly in all of our neighborhoods to make sure that the map that was adopted was reflected from the work of the people. And the map that was adopted from the work of the people in this neighborhood actually changed the plan support from five stories down to two and three, because that was the will of what the people in this neighborhood and the registered neighborhood organizations wanted. So I'm sitting here and as I was, the reason why I wasn't paying attention right now is because I was looking through the MSA zone district. So I like zoning. I think it's pretty clear on what you can do and what you cannot do. So if we were to pass this rezoning, we could have duplexes, we could have tandem house, we could have row house, we could have townhome, and we can have an apartment for them. And then we could also have a drive thru service on the corner of 17th and Sheridan. And the most interesting thing that I find in this is that the general intent of an EMS zone district is to improve compatibility with and respect for the existing character and context of Denver and its neighborhood. Give prominence to the pedestrian realm as a defining element of a neighborhood character. And I could go on and on and on. And I will tell you one thing. Chardon is not a pedestrian neighborhood. Sheridan is scary. Sheridan from Colfax to 17. People cannot walk. They push their strollers in the right of way. Nobody can get there. It's a transit quarter. So I do not agree with the fact that we are going to mess. And I will agree with Bruce that that was forced upon us by community planning and development, because as many of you know and as many of you, especially you like Robin and Debbie, have you ever heard KPD say that the council office got to pick a zone district? Now you go in front of community planning and development. You do your pre-application. I have done them for council members. They push you into a zone district and then it's your job as the applicant to come up with the five criteria that meet the rezoning. So I will I thank you, Bruce. I know that that is to be true. I also know it to be true that this neighborhood does need more development. You. The Jewish community is suffering. It's sad. I feel sad that you all are being pushed out. And I also understand that if this were to get rezoning, we might find a developer who might do more bedrooms. We're not thinking outside the box. We're looking at the application before us, which is very challenging. And before I go on, I just want to for those crazy people who are watching at 1145 at night, I want to talk about what's called a supermajority. It's not called a supermajority. It's called a petition protest. And that is what this neighborhood did. So anyone can have a petition protest. It could be in a minority neighborhood, which I actually think the Jewish people in this neighborhood considered are considered a minority. So thank you for owning your homes and thank you for doing the hard work to get a petition protest done. It's not easy. It's been happening. It's in the Denver zoning code. And so, Ana, I do not agree with what she said. I just had to go on the record and state that I actually do believe that the Jewish community in West Colfax have been a minority. For as long as you all have been there. You have not been the majority. So in that vein, I have been sitting here vacillating back and forth. What do I do as the councilperson? What is my role? And I think I have to go back to my values. I have to start with my values. And my values are that we need more housing in northwest Denver and we need more opportunity in northwest Denver. And we need developers to look at this. Yet at the same time, I do not believe that we can use our housing as a Swiss Swiss bank account. I don't agree that you can just suddenly have three land owners. What if one wants to sell and the other one doesn't want to sell and then these three parcels get broken up or four parcels get broken up. There's no guarantee that this is and we've moved forward in one section. So I just have to go back to EMS, provide human scale and buildings through the use of detail, contrast form windows, doors, placement, provide identifiable pedestrian connections between private development, public right of ways and more time modes of transportation. So in that vein, I will have to vote no on this because of the mess, and it just does not match Sheridan. And I just want everyone to know I hope to never be sitting on this site again. I was elected July 15th, running on the fact that hopefully I can be a good facilitator. And I just want you to know I feel guilty. I was in the council office when this came through. I attended the first meetings to establish a working group, a task force. I thought it was going somewhere. I left the office in November, and I am sorry that you didn't have the representation that took you forward to get this done. I think it could have happened. I really do. And so I feel disappointed by what has happened. And I feel I take accountability and I take responsibility for that. But thank you all for staying here this evening. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman Hines. Thank you, Mr. President. I'll just be brief. I you know, the first metric for both Blueprint 2019 and current Plan 2040 is equity. And I want to make sure that we provide an equitable solution here. And I am a bit troubled by considering equity with this particular rezoning. Why is this rezoning better than the original zoning? I'm not certain I know that particular because we don't have an immediate developer in, you know. Waiting for this rezoning. The M's form troubles me a little bit as well, which has already been discussed. And the final thing is, well, two more things, I guess. It sounds like there's a robust stakeholder process that has just started or will start on October 3rd. So either way, it seems like we've got something in front of us that in the very near future that will have a lot of comment that will affect this not only these particular plots, but but also the area for this particular Jewish community that would allow them for a lot of them, with with more comment. And the last thing I would say is, please, if you're going to have a stakeholder process, allow them to have some at least some of them to happen, not on the Shabbat . Thank you. Thank you, Councilman. Councilman Sawyer. Thank you, Mr. President. I also am going to have to be a know tonight. I am very concerned about the public safety issues with this rezoning, not only because I think as we delve further into this, it it is the wrong zoning district. It's not. There's something very wrong here. But also because we've got you know, we're talking about 80 to 100 units added on a parcel of land to get a sidewalk, it seems like, which doesn't make a lot of sense, logically speaking, you know, and we're talking about adding density to a community of people who, yes, need a sidewalk so that they can walk around the community. But the trade offs there don't seem to make a lot of sense. There's just the disconnect here. It's just not it's just it's not. Something is wrong. And so I think that the there are just the safety implications of what we're talking about here and the public welfare implications of what we're talking about here. Just don't add up. And I think that unfortunately, that means going back to the drawing board. And I'm I'm you know, I'm sorry for that because I think that you guys are really the victims of a mistake in our planning board or, you know, in CPD somewhere along the way or in a disconnect in our council office somewhere along the way, I'm not sure, but it stinks. And so I think that that I hope that you will go back to the drawing board and find something that works better and come back and I'm sorry that you had to stay this late at night for that. But I do think that we have a responsibility to our community as a whole to make sure that the decisions that we make, especially when it comes to zoning, do make sense for public safety and welfare. And this just simply doesn't. So I will be a no tonight. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilwoman Torres. I just want to mention a couple of things. Yes. The West area plan kicks off on Saturday. October 5th. That won't be the only opportunity. And I guarantee you, Councilwoman Sandoval and I, because we share the West Colfax neighborhood, will absolutely make concerted efforts to find times when your entire community can weigh in on the West Area plan. I guarantee you that. One thing that I would mention, though, is that what I'm finding in a number of other neighborhood conversations that are preparing to enter in that West Area plan, they're already thinking about how do we proactively plan for density so that density doesn't happen to our neighborhoods, to the communities that we live in without kind of our participation or our say, how do we proactively zone? And so those are conversations that Villa Park is having, that Westwood is having, that Varnum is having. And and those are going to be some of the things that will filter into the West Area plan as you go farther down. Sheridan You find a mix five mix eight m2, and so you do find density. This is where density should be on Sheridan Boulevard. And I'm compelled, though, that we've lost an opportunity for better conversation here. I would say that in all of these options, Main Street seems to be one that would protect the interior of your single family home neighborhood. And that's one thing to consider among the variety of options that could encroach farther in Main Street would only be on Sheridan. So I'm I'm struggling a little bit with the direction, but I know that there'll be a lot more opportunity to figure out. What happens in West Colfax. And and and I'll support the community in a lot of that. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman Flynn. Thank you, Mr. President. I got to know this community very well. About 13 years ago when I was at the Rocky Mountain News and RTD was going to start construction of the West Rail line. And that's where I became familiar with your roof. And I walked past the A Mikva that's there on Equipment Street, I believe, and that's Beth Israel and the boys school there. Who the name of which escapes me on the north side of Colfax talked to this is the the the home not only of the west side Jewish community, which as I discovered, was vastly different from the east side Jewish community, but also for over a century had been very well integrated with the Latino community as well, side by side everywhere from lower Colfax, down by the old Starr Bakery, all the way west to the Jefferson County line. I learned so much about these communities living together for decades. And I'm very appreciative of that, of knowing that heritage and hearing some of it come alive again tonight. Thank you. Because of that and because of the testimony I heard from that community, I think a strong case has been made that criteria three has not been met , that this does not further public health, safety and welfare because of the impact it has on the character of the community. One of the directives in Blueprint Denver is that while we grow intentionally and carefully, that we pay attention to conserving and preserving the character of our diverse existing neighborhoods. They're very different all over town. You will find neighborhoods that have different character. We talk about building complete neighborhoods, but those neighborhoods are all they all have their different character. That doesn't mean they all look have to look alike. And so I don't think I can support this tonight because I think it fails on criteria three. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilman Flynn, Councilman Cashman. Yeah. Thank you, Mr. President. I also have concern about I have concerned about criteria one and criteria three as far as adopted plan. If the city has decided that it's time for this neighborhood to have a new plan that is is basically already started, I guess the formation of the the steering committee. I can't rely on a plan from 2006 as having much validity. And as has been stated with with such division, I think it makes sense to be more protective of health, safety and welfare to have that extended community discussion. Now, there may be a bad news to all of that, depending on your point of view and where this planning process ends up. As Councilwoman Torres said, there's no guarantee you get two and three stories there. I would advise the community, if this does get voted down tonight, that you be very, very involved and do your best to get the the outcome that's best for this community. And the while it's not. Maybe it's directly related or not. I think looking to the future for all of our neighborhoods, an increase in the number of multi bedroom units. Again, I think furthers the health, safety and welfare of the community. So I'll have to vote no this evening. Thank you, Councilman Cashman. Councilman Black. Thank you, Mr. President. This is a tough one. I agree with the comments of everyone has made tonight. I actually do think it meets the criteria, but I also recognize there are issues with it. And the fact that the neighborhood plan is coming is very compelling. We've had other rezoning similar to this over the years on Colorado Boulevard and other busy streets that neighbors have opposed . But we spend an awful lot of time working on Blueprint Denver, and it does, as Councilman Torres points out, really does want us to put density on those commercial corridors. And that does not mean that it is going to go into the neighborhood. Those are there's very different. Appropriate plan, support for what would go on a busy. Corridor versus what would go in a residential neighborhood. We can all count. And I think it's very clear that this is not going to pass tonight. As I said, I am I am torn. I do think it meets the plan's support. So I am going to support it because I feel like that is my job. But I'm I'm hopeful that you all will come up with a better solution. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman. Black Council Manager. Thank you, Mr. President. I was going to say two different criteria than some of my colleagues, which is the uniformity of district regulations. I don't think similarly situated properties that are on a sloped site like this can possibly meet the Main Street expectations for activation in terms of of just what we expect of a main street, you know, Tennyson as a main street 32nd and little even 25th in federal by Edgewater makes sense as a main street. I just think that this was a little bit overly broad and I don't think we would treat a similarly situated property property as a main street if it weren't just that it had been painted with that brush . So I think it fails to meet the criteria, I will say. For me, it's not so much just about pure density. The only I rarely, you know, on especially on a thoroughfare, you know, vote against density. But the site matters. And, you know, the one other site Colorado needs, Hartsdale, that I also voted against was for a similar reason. I will say in that example, the applicants did come back with a different proposal and were able to rezone to something that I think worked better for a very awkward site as as this one is. So I want to thank the applicants for for being here and for making your case. And I want to thank those who testified. I want to make clear that as persuasive as folks, folks, the story and the community cohesion is, it's the criteria that is the basis of the vote. And so that's that's why, you know, I'm voting this way. But I do hope that folks stay at the table. I guess I would disagree that you can't continue to talk while a new plan is coming. The current plans are in effect. There's a lot of guidance in those citywide plans that are brand new. And I think that it probably behooves everyone to get certainty by continuing to talk than waiting for a two year planning process. So I might differ a little bit with my colleagues about that. I would suggest your position is best if you get to the table as soon as everyone gets some sleep and recovers and figures out whether or not with a little more focus on feasibility on the actual site. And I will say I'm I'm a little disappointed that y'all didn't get a chance to get some actual advice. You have a ready made market for three bedroom units. Part of the reason they don't build them in LoDo is because three, you know, families with that many kids don't want to live in LoDo, but to look at that and make a decision about what's feasible in your market, you deserve site specific market information. And I would I would hope that if you are going to continue, you shouldn't agree to something you don't feel like is feasible. But I think you have a very different market for very different reasons in your site and you deserve actual feasibility from your site and not just some generic analysis of the whole city, including places like Reno, that are just not going to be applicable. So so I hope that you can get that so that you can come to the table and understand what's really possible for you all. And with that, I'll be voting no tonight. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Kennedy. Councilman Ortega. Thank you, Mr. President. I just wanted to. Add that I think the biggest challenge with this particular site is the fact that it is very, very difficult to get a curb cut from court, from, you know, being able to access the site off of Sheridan, which means the traffic will come in on what was at any street and and then it would be through the alley. And I think that challenges the safety of the neighborhood. I heard a lot of discussion about people from the Jewish community having to walk down many of the alleys. And that safety concern, I think, is is real. But we know that Sheridan needs sidewalks. This conversation should not be about sidewalks. We know that developments that come into the city have to provide their their own infrastructure. And so in this case, that would would have needed to be done. And I was right there with Councilman Espinosa before we even knew there was a reason application for this area. Fighting for sidewalks on this part of Sheridan, because it's on a slope where you see people walking in the snow with strollers or with children trying to traverse being that close to the bus and traffic that's on Sheridan Boulevard. So the safety concerns, you know, with this being a slope site really are somewhat concerning. But, you know, the city would have made sure those sidewalks were put in in in a way that could allow people to walk through there and do that safely. But I think the need for a curb cut to get access to this site is one of the biggest challenges. I've worked on some of those kinds of projects, and they're not always approved. And so that that makes this area even more challenging to try to develop on it. So I'm not going to be supporting it tonight as well. I appreciate the work that everybody put into it. Thank you all for staying so late. I'm sorry. The previous process, you know, went went on as long as it did. But I think this is the right decision tonight. And there's plenty of opportunity to to look at the right way to do this. And I think the fact that the the area plan is moving forward really gives the opportunity to to look at the area a little bit more comprehensively and figure out how it all fits in together. So thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilwoman Ortega. Thank you all for sticking it out this late. Councilmembers is a reminder that community planning and development has determined a requirement for a legal protest has been met. Ten affirmative votes instead of the standard seven affirmative votes of council are required to pass this bill. Madam Secretary, Roll Call. Sandoval Black Eye. CDEBACA No. Flynn No. GILLMOR No. HINES No. Cashman No. Kenny Ortega No. Sawyer No. Torres, I. Mr. President? No. Madam Secretary, please close the voting. Announce the results. Ten days to ICE. Ten days to council. Bill 577 has failed depending on publication. On Monday, September 23rd, 2019, Council will hold a required public hearing on Council Bill 19 0913 designating 4345 West 46th Avenue as a structure for preservation. We'll see you in 9 hours for budget hearings.

Recommendation to adopt resolution authorizing City Manager to execute a contract with Consolidated Fabricators Corporation, of Vernon, CA, for the purchase of commercial trash containers on the same terms and conditions afforded to the City of Santa Monica, CA, in an annual amount not to exceed $180,000, for a period of one year, with the option of renewing for one additional one-year period, at the discretion of the City Manager. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_04212015_15-0346

Councilman. Motion carries seven zero. Item number 28 Report from Public Works and Financial Management. Recommendation to adopt resolution to execute a contract with Consolidated Fabric Fabricators Corporation for the purchase of commercial trash containers in an annual amount not to exceed 180,000 citywide. Key to emotion is emotion and a second tour staff report. Aura. I want to be like Chris Garner when I grow up. Oh the item be put before you. Honorable. Vice Mayor and council members is for a piggyback contract with the purchase of trash receptacles or containers and the amount of hundred $80,000. We have worked with this company before, but we're using the piggyback with city of Santa monica, and we're looking for your approval. There's been a motion by Councilman Austin and a second by Councilmember Urunga. And thank you, Mr. Milloy. And so any member of the public that wishes to address counsel on this item seeing none. Members, cast your vote. Motion carries seven zero. Item number 29 Report from police. Recommendation to determine the application serves the public convenience and necessity and received for the application of Trader Joe's company for premise to premise transfer on an ABC license at 4250 Man Beach Boulevard, District eight.

Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing, and consider third-party appeals (APL17-020 and APL17-021) from Bea Bea Jiménez, David White, Karin McGinley, Tino Haramis, Kazumi Hiromoto, Tetsu Hashimoto, and Warren Blesofsky (representing Long Beach Citizens for Fair Development); Adopt resolution finding that the 320 Alamitos Project is consistent with the Downtown Plan Program Environmental Impact Report and subject to the Downtown Plan Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and making certain findings and determinations related thereto; and Uphold the Planning Commission’s decision to approve a Site Plan Review (SPR17-001) and Lot Merger (LM17-002) for the construction of a seven-story, 77-unit residential development at 320 Alamitos Avenue in the Downtown Planned Development District (PD-30). (District 2)

LongBeachCC_10172017_17-0933

Okay. So now we're going to move on to our hearing agenda. And so well, let's go ahead and cue up hearing number one. In a report from Development Services recommendation to receive this supporting documentation into the record. Conclude the public hearing and consider third party appeals from Long Beach Citizens for Fair Development and uphold the Planning Commission's decision to approve a site plan, review and merger for the construction of a seven story 77 unit. Residential development at 320 Alamitos Avenue. In the Downtown Planned Development District. District two. Thank you. And Tom, I know you have some comments here. I think this is just to make a motion to continue this to October 24th. Okay. So it's been moved and seconded. Any public comment on containing this item saying no members, please cast your vote. Mr. Vice Mayors, voting on this matter. I'd just like to point out that in the agenda packet for this item, there is a resolution that relates to. Environmental matters that is also in the. Packet and it's on the clerk's website. It did not make it as part. Of the recommended action for this item. So you will be receiving a revised staff. Report on the supplemental agenda. So it'll be available next when the hearing takes place. Thank you. So, members, please cast your vote.

A bill for an ordinance amending Chapter 30 (Landmark Preservation) of the Revised Municipal Code. Amends Chapter 30 of the Denver Revised Municipal Code (DRMC), Landmark Ordinance to simplify designation criteria, add criteria associated with cultural significance, to extend time frames for demolition/designation review process, to add required mediation and to clarify language and ensure consistency throughout the ordinance. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 9-10-19.

DenverCityCouncil_09232019_19-0914

Name. 11 Eyes one day Council Bill 19 0776 has passed. Madam Secretary, if you please put the next item on our screens and Councilman BLOCK, go ahead with your comment on 914. Thank you, Mr. President. I'm commenting on the first reading of this bill because I won't be here next week for the public hearing. This is the landmark ordinance. I'm very supportive of the new ordinance and the efforts of the task force, and I'm very pleased at some of the changes, including simplifying the criteria, adding culture and allowing additional time for discussion and negotiation as part of the bill. Historic preservation is very important to me. I am a Denver native and I'm a historian. I have a master's degree in history, and I've seen a lot of our historic buildings tragically destroyed over the years. I have supported every owner initiated historic designation that's come to council as have 100% of the council. That said, I have always been concerned about owner opposed landmark designation efforts that impinge on private property rights council has been put in the very uncomfortable position of having to preside over some pretty awful public hearings when some owners were having to defend their property rights. Recently, Tom's Diner brought the issue to the forefront for a lot of residents. I've heard from hundreds of constituents and residents who were shocked to learn that Mr. Messina's plans for his property and his future could be undermined by strangers. I was disappointed that the task force did not recommend a higher bar for these types of hostile designations, putting the burden on council to strike the balance between property rights and the public benefit of designation. In these controversial owner opposed cases, I believe, along with some of my fellow council members and many residents, that there should be a higher bar and near consensus, not just a simple minority majority when an owner is in opposition. I know that truly historic structures should and will garner that near consensus support. Councilwoman Gilmore and I had hoped to amend this bill to require a supermajority of ten or nine votes to approve owner opposed designations. The amendment would have simply raise the bar when owners are not in support to ensure that the property very clearly meets or exceeds the criteria. Unfortunately, we don't have the votes tonight to amend it, but I do hope that our fellow council members will reach out to their constituents to gauge their feelings on the issue and that we can discuss this proposal in the future. It's also important to note that I have heard that there are some residents who feel strongly about the property rights issue and are considering a citizen initiated ballot measure that would require the city to compensate owners when their property is designated without their consent. This proposed ballot measure could have a chilling effect on future designations. In the meantime, I do hope that the ordinance will prove to be successful, resulting in more owner initiated designations and better outcomes for our neighborhoods. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman Hood. Thank you, Mr. President. I just wanted to say Tom Steiner was in Denver's perfect ten and still sorry. And the last I checked, at least, and that was one of the first things I started dealing with as a as a council person. I look forward to the conversation next week, and I look forward to learning more about the the stakeholder process that was, I think, a year in length that came up with the current for the current proposal that is contained in House Bill nine or excuse me, in City Council Bill 9142. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilman. All right. See no other comments. Madam Secretary, will you please put the next item on our screens? And, Councilman Flynn, you want to go ahead with your comments on 921?

Order for a hearing regarding recycling, compost, and waste services in the City of Boston.

BostonCC_02022022_2022-0242

Lucky number. Zero two for two. Councilor Bullock offered the following or for a hearing regarding recycling, compost and waste services in the city of Boston. The chair recognizes counsel. Counsel, walk up the floor. Thank you, Mr. President. And, Mr. President, can I please request suspension of Rule 12 and add Councilor Braden and Councilor Flaherty as original co-sponsors on the item? It is console console boxing suspension of Rule 12 to add councilors, councilors, Braydon and Council Clarity. Yes. He has original co-sponsor seeing and hearing no objection. Those councilors are added. Thank you, Councilor Bach. The floor is yours. Great. Thank you so much, Councilor Flynn. And this is another city services thing and a sort of core municipal function, which is all the different ways that we deal with waste in the city of Boston, and in particular thinking about how we deal with all the ways. That isn't just simple trash. I think the real intention of this hearing order is one information. I think often residents in the city of Boston don't know about all the ways that we have of disposing of things like e-waste or the existing car host program, cardiovascular or, you know, things about how single stream recycling works. So certainly we want to create a platform for kind of informing people about the city's suite of programs right now and making sure that councils are up to speed on those. But this is another space where exactly, as Councilor Baker said, there is a real opportunity and a pressing need and in this case, a pressing environmental need to expand the services that the city offers and to think about how we do that internally in the city, how we build capacity, have good public jobs. And and really composting is something that we've sort of been at the edges of thinking about a serious curbside composting program for a while as a city. It's something that many other cities in the US thinking of Seattle, San Francisco have and have had robustly for a while now that we in Boston have not. And it's definitely a kind of another sort of systems need and it's a set of job opportunities. But then also I think with the the e-waste so thinking about how people dispose of batteries, how people dispose of all the electronics. Are more and more part of our life. And have these rare earth metals that are, you know, the reason for all kinds of all kinds of mining activity all over the world. I think we just have to think about what are the cutting edge strategies for getting these things recycled most effectively and well. And then as we know and it's something that Councilor O'Malley has brought up repeatedly. Recycling and the economics of recycling have really shifted over the last few years, such that what used to make the city money now cost the city money. There are some places in the country that are sort of experimenting with other approaches in order to reverse that dynamic. There's also questions again about it and the point at which we're paying other people to do a lot of processing instead of them paying us for the privilege, you know, does it make sense to bring some more of that in-house? So this is really designed to be a little bit of a catch all hearing to talk with public works. It's the same story. Our public works staff do an unbelievable job with waste and handling all these different streams. And just think about how the how the council can support them and support the city in building out more robust systems for the kind of the kind of green waste management that we really need in the contemporary city. So I'm looking forward to holding a hearing. And thank you, Mr. President, and to my co-sponsors, councilors. Great. And employers. Thank you, Councilor Bach. Anyone else like to speak on this? The chair recognizes. Counsel Baker. Counsel Baker. You have the floor. Mr.. Mr.. President, if I. If I may. This is a point of order. My co-sponsors, councilors Brayton and Flaherty. I think it might. If there was an opportunity for them to speak before the open floor, that would be. Appreciate it. Yes. Yeah. That was my mistake. The good Shia recognized as Council of Britain. Thank you, Mr. President. And thank you to the media for including me in this as a co-sponsor. This conversation is timely for us to review and very timely for us to review the cities recycling, compost and weeds with services, as well as ways to increase public awareness. Our office also conducted a survey last year distributed to members and leaders within our Orthodox Jewish community here in Brighton, with many community members expressing frustration that they could not drop off the list on the designated Saturdays when they observe the Sabbath. So as a result, we partnered with our local public works yard to host alternatives, hazardous waste drop offs, top up for members of the. Orthodox. Community, ensuring that our services were in ensuring that our services are increasingly culturally competent and accessible to all of our community members. This is a an opportunity that we offer twice a year in partnership with our public works department. And it really helps get those recyclables that folks are want to have just full stuff with responsibly to have them an opportunity to recycle on time that's culturally appropriate. I also look forward to discussing the status of expanding the project roster and the city's 24 hour community compost pilot program. We have only one location here in Brighton at the San Gardens Beach Development and we look to increasing, look forward to increasing convenient access to this service and and also with regard to the cost of recycling. We did then go from being a money maker to being a cost to actually making a cost to to recycle. But I just heard a news story on the on the radio this past few weeks about a city. And in New Hampshire, it's actually generating income from their recycling program. Obviously, it's a much smaller municipality, but I think we need to look at ways to make our recycling program more effective and to not be such a drain on our city resources. So I really look forward to this conversation and thank you to the maker. Thank you, counsel. Counsel Bret and the Chair recognizes counselor Flannery. Counsel Flannery, the floor is yours. Mr. President, then I want to commend the leadership of our colleague, Counsel Locke, and thank you for including me in recognizing my efforts on the Council during the single stream recycling. Myself and Councilor Ross on behalf of the Council led those efforts, as well as the distribution of those big blue recycling bins that were distributed across the city. And the previous Speaker Council nailed it with respect to the recycling cost. Our efforts back then to do the single stream recycling was to reduce the cost of the trash collection. And then we started a partnership working with folks that wanted to do the compost, and we thought it would sort of be a three legged part of the stool. You put your household trash in, you put your recyclables, and then you have a compost option. And as she just referenced, the recycling costs now are arguably outpacing the trash cost with no one really knowing what to do or where to put it, whether you're shipping out your bag, you know, your truck it out. But ultimately those costs are increasing. And we continue to see the city's trash collection costs go through the roof. And most folks obviously enjoy the one day a week. There are some communities, the ones that are more densely populated with very little space, have enjoyed at 1.2 day a week collections. But in any event, keeping our eye on these costs, trying to be creative in identifying ways to eliminate one that costs, but also sort of the distribution, I guess, of our waste. And clearly the share a lead sponsor here is right on the ball. I look forward to partnering with her to find these creative solutions to drive those costs down, but to give folks creative options, to do their part, to make our world a better and in much cleaner place. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, counsel. Clarity. The chair recognizes Counselor Baker. Baker Council. Baker, you have the floor. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And thank you to the makeup Counselor Bok for for keeping our eye on this counsel. Flynn said again, this can be looked at and viewed as a way for us to build infrastructure, especially at this time, especially with is ARPA money ARPA money out there with with something like with an investment, a true investment, whether it's ten, 15, $20 million. If we were to build an organic digester and to be able to divert all your organic organics waste out of that stream, it would be it would be a cost savings for the city. It would do wonders for the environment, and we would also be provide jobs. That's one thing I think we should be looking at it as a as a as a body. Also, we need real conversations around recycling. We went to the singles frame where we used to, you know, separate out the the the cardboard from the from the glass from the from the plastic. I think we're going to have to get back to something more more designated like that, where we're more separating out because it's in that it's in that mixing up everything that the recycling becomes contaminated, then we're unable to sell it. Not to mention that the places that we're buying, all our recycling in China or India are now no longer buying any, any of that. So all the things that we've heard about recycling being, we never really made that much money with it, but it was at least cost neutral. Now that cost is being on added on top of our of our waste contract. I think the last I think last year not sure we're just throwing it out there. We spend about a 250 million on our contracts for shipping costs, for our for our trash and our recycling. So if we're able to build any infrastructure with money that's available to us and put people to work and healthy, that help help our bottom line numbers and also put people to work, I think that's a win. So again, Council Bach, thank you for bringing this to our attention and please sign my name. Thank you. Thank you. Councilor Baker, anyone else like to speak on this matter? I will speak. I will speak briefly. I just want to echo some comments Councilor Baker has made. It's also critical to make sure that we educate residents on how to take out trash, how to take out recycling. I've spent a lot of time and effort on this in the Southend and in Chinatown as well, but it's not as simple as just taking your trash out. We do have to work with residents. We have to work with neighborhood organizations, small businesses, restaurants to really educate people and including providing this information in other languages as well . But the public awareness campaign is also a critical part of this, and I hope we can add that aspect as well during the day during the hearing. So. So thank you, Counsel Bach. If anyone else would like to add their name, please raise your hand, please, at councilor me here, please. Councilor Arroyo. Please. Councilor Laurel, please. The chair, please. Councilor Murphy, please. That Councilor Tanya Fernandez Anderson, please. That council. Have adjourned. God please out console Laura Dawkins zero two for two will be referred to the Committee on City and City Services Innovation Technology. Mr. Clerk, please read docket 0243, please.

Recommendation to approve naming the Social Hall or Kitchen at the Cesar Chavez Community Center in Honor of Mrs. Ruth Ricker.

LongBeachCC_07182017_17-0563

Thank you. So we're going to take up item number 28 next. Item 28 is a communication from Councilwoman Gonzalez, Mayor Garcia and Councilmember Urunga. Recommendation two Request that the Housing and Neighborhoods Committee consider. Renaming the Senior. Meals Program at Cesar Chavez Park. The Ruth Reichl Senior Meals Program. Thank you, Councilwoman Gonzalez. Yes, I would like to first thank Mayor Garcia, who is not here, but Councilmember Suranga as well, for joining me on this item. As many of you know or may have known in previous meetings and discussions, we've talked about Ruth Recor. She was a strong and passionate person whose advocacy changed the lives of many, not only here in Long Beach, but really across Southern California. She long advocated to see the affordable housing was in place for many seniors as well as the senior meal program. I would often spend many times with her at the coffee shop right next to Village Treasures. Now Dollies, that was her favorite spot. And we would talk about the senior meal program. And when she passed away, I thought, what a perfect program to reinstate at Chavez Park, but what a perfect person to name it after. I also want to acknowledge Don Darren, our who is here from our senior advisory commission and Barbie as well, and many of the community members who have long supported Ruth in her life and also afterwards. I would also like to acknowledge her amazing family here. Juanita Ricker, who is Ruth's daughter, Jason Ricker, her son Macksville, of course, owner of Village Treasures on Broadway, Carolyn Christian Hines, Gayle Wilson, Julie Nemechek and Wynn Collins. I want to thank you all for being here and supporting her. And so, with that said, this program is currently in place at Chavez Park and it is serving many seniors in our area, especially those who happen to be of incomes that are lower income. And with that said, I want to just thank everyone for being a supportive as possible with this. I ask my colleagues to be all be supportive of this as well. But the contributions of Ms.. Ricker on behalf of older adults across the city of Long Beach should not go unnoticed. She was truly, truly a community leader who fought for the reinstatement of this program. And now here we have it. So thank you very much. Thank you. Next, we have Councilmember Elanga. I mean, for support of Councilmember Gonzalez's motion. And I hope that this moves forward. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Angie. Yes. Also, you know, as chair of the Housing and Labor Committee, you know, I will be very, very excited and happy to have this. You know, when we do bring it up to make sure that this, you know, go into full operation. We want to thank you guys for being here to support this item. Thank you again. Thank you, Councilmember Pearce. Yes. I also want to thank my colleague for bringing us forward. I had the opportunity to meet Ruth on several occasions and so it's great to be able to name something that brings such value to our community. And so thank you very much. Great job. Thank you. And I'll just I'll just add what an honor this is for your mother and congratulations to you and your family. And you have my complete support. And thank you, Councilmember Gonzalez and our mayor and councilman, your angel, for taking a lead on this. And I do encourage the whole council to support this. Is there any public comment on this item? Good evening, Don. Darn. Our vice mayor and council members. I just wanted to make a couple comments regarding Ruth. She was on the Senior Citizens Advisory Commission with me. She was the little girl that I tell you. She had a lot of spunk and energy and she come up with all kind of ideas and she'd make sure they followed up on. And that just explains the kind of person she was and why we should be honoring her with this. We're so glad to have this this senior meals program going. And I think I hope it's going to continue because we need support on this. And I'm so glad that we're going to honor her with this name. Also, we were talking about having a tree planted in her honor and also in the Chavez park there. But I just wanted to make a point of of what a grand lady this is and her her the children that she's raised. They're great people. You just can't believe what a wonderful family this was. No. As I see her leave this earth as she did. And I really admired her. And I just want to support this. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good evening. Counsel. Name's Jason Berger. I'm son here of my sister. And I just want to thank you. Thank you, leader. I know one mother put a lot. Of work in with with you. And Mayor Garcia, and so I just really want to thank you for that and no vanity at all. But that you know, and you know, I'm as humble as my mother. We're all as humble as she was. So we just appreciate the thought. Thank you. Thank you. And makes me the boss. Good afternoon. I also knew Ruth not very well, but at every committee community event she was there. Our Wilmore Heritage meeting. She would show up at the for the need or whatever it was need to be supported. She was a lady with a lot of class and greatly missed. And I wholeheartedly support this. And I mean, we should be outside of the statue, but a tree. Definitely should be at Cesar Chavez. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Okay. Rabbi Pete from California, greater vote, Republican like local Republicans, but more Republican. So that's good. She has a good name, it seems like I don't know her, but she had to have had a good name in order to be there, unlike some other people that shouldn't even be here. Who's asking? Councilman Woman Anything about what I don't want to hear about? Nothing, she asked, respectfully. That's off topic, brother. Hey, this is the topic. This is a good one. Been on time. I'm on topic. I'm talking about the name and this is topic and I'm here. Listen, you guys are here to listen. You guys are getting paid by the people, so I don't need my conversation guide. I'm a tell you what's on topic. It would be off topic if she would resign and she wasn't here. That's what I'm saying. That's the. Last time. What do you mean? Warning. You need to stay on topic. This is not general public comment. So hey, I don't already mixed. I'm talking about this and now you're going to tell me what to say? Is that what you're going to do? Can you give me my time back? You want to play hardball first? You told me I couldn't do something that the man said was legal. And. Okay, going here, you're going to start telling me stuff that I can do and I can't do. Just off winging it, because that's what you did. Now you're going to stop me. Yeah. Now she's glad because I'm not on her and I'm talking to you now. But like I said, she shouldn't be here. I'm sick of seeing. Her for your time. Sorry. So. So we'll take it back behind around Councilwoman Gonzalez. Or city attorney, would you like to go first? Thank you. Councilmember Gonzalez, the the issue, I think, has become this is a new thing in naming a program, and it's as part of a park program. It probably should also include a referral to the Parks and Rec Commission for their discussion and whether and how. You decide. That. But I would hope that you would amend your motion to send it to Parks and Rec Commission also. Absolutely. We will definitely do that. And since this is a the first time that we've done this, I appreciate the amendment. And I would just say that just to have the last word about Ruth, because this is really about Ruth, is that she was a very forward thinking person. And I know that she would be very happy if we that we're obviously reinstating this. I want to once again thank the family for being here. I know that she lives definitely in each of you and her humbleness and her gratitude for community. And thank you again. Thank you so much for the public comment. Members, please cast your vote. Motion case. Thank you. Next, we'll have item number 29, please. Congratulations. We'll have item number 20.

A bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification for 755 Lafayette Street in Country Club. Approves an official map amendment to rezone property from U-SU-C to U-SU-C1 (allows for an accessory dwelling unit), located at 755 Lafayette Street in Council District 10. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 8-4-20.

DenverCityCouncil_09142020_20-0716

13 eyes. Council Bill 7-Eleven has passed. Councilmember Flynn, would you please put Council Bill seven and 16 on the floor for passage? Yes, Madam President, I move that council bill 20 dash 716 be placed upon final consideration and do pass. Thank you. It has been moved. Make it a second. Okay. Wonderful. Second comments by members of Council Councilmember Hines. Thank you, Madam President. Per the request of the applicant, this application is being withdrawn. So I'm asking my colleagues to vote no to defeat this bill. All right. Thank you, Councilman. Seen no other members? Just a reminder, council members, please vote no on this. Madam Secretary, roll call irons. No. Cashman? No. Kimmich. No Ortega. Oh. Sandoval. No. Sawyer now. Torres. No. Black? No. See the. Clark. No. Flynn may. Herndon May. No. Madam Secretary, close the voting and announce the results. 12 nays. 12 nays. Counsel Bill 716 has been defeated there being no further business before this body. This meeting is adjourned.

A bill for an ordinance designating 2145 South Adams Street, the Ormleigh House, as a structure for preservation. Approves an individual Denver landmark designation for property located at 2145 South Adams Street in Council District 6. The Committee approved filing this bill at its meeting on 2-27-18.

DenverCityCouncil_03192018_18-0215

11 eyes, one ni. Congratulations. One of three has passed. All right, we have another bill. Councilman Flynn, would you put 215 on the floor? Yes, Mr. President. I move the council. Bill. I'm sorry. Wrong page. Move the council bill to 15 series of 2018. Be placed upon final consideration and do pass. All right. Thank you, Councilman Flynn. It has been moved and seconded. Public hearing for Council Bill 215 is now open. We have the staff report. Karen, how are you? Are you having a good day? I am, yeah. Good. Yeah. Good evening. I'm Karen with Lane Preservation with Community Planning and Development. And this is for 2145 South Adams, known as Gormley for Landmark Designation Landmark Preservation, was established in 1967 to designate, preserve and protect important historic resources. Currently, there are 336 individual landmarks 53 historic districts, which make up about 4% of the buildings in the city and county of Denver. Landmarks applications can be submitted through a variety of means. This one is submitted by the property owner. Once something is designated as historic, it goes through landmark design review, but it is not required to have to be restored to a particular time or place. However, demolitions are highly discouraged. Landmark Preservation recently in 2014 and then in 2016, recently updated our design guidelines with the intent of providing an objective review process for people who come through the process and are designated as historic districts. If something is or a structure, if something is designated, it will go through design review for a variety of topics like fences or zone light amendments, solar panels, reroofing additions, or things for secondary structures with the intent of preserving the character. Defining features of the structure. But also the design guidelines are intended to allow both applicants and staff to process this with an objective processing. In 2017, about 80% of landmark designation or landmark design review applications were approved by staff. We had about 1600 design review applications of they fall into sort of three different categories. Quick reviews that are typically done in about one business day. Smaller projects that are about 10 to 15 business days. And larger projects that would go before the Landmark Preservation Commission. So depending on any changes that would be proposed to this particular building, it would either be administratively reviewed by staff or go to the commission for their review. If something is designated as a historic property such as this property, it would be eligible for the Colorado Historic Preservation Rehabilitation Tax Credits, which would mean that 20% of any part of the project could be claimed as a tax credit. So that would be of benefit to this particular property owner. The designation process that came in in January, it went before the Landmark Preservation Commission at a public hearing in February of 2018, and then it was passed forward by by Rudy. And first reading was last week. Landmark Preservation sent out owner notification letters notified the registered neighborhood organizations as well as other courtesy notifications, notified City Council and planning board, posted signage and then did a courtesy notification after the Landmark Preservation Commission to the property owner. This particular property is located in Council District six. It's in the University Park neighborhood on Adams between Evans and Warren. It's in an area of stability in Blueprint Denver. And the owner of this property is Rita Hill. She initiated this designation process, but was is unable to be here due to health. She has worked with the R.A. in historic Denver to shepherd this process through and to work on writing the designation application. This designation application is required to do two things per the landmark ordinance. Maintain its historic and physical integrity. Meet at least one criterion in two of the following categories history, architecture and geography. And relate to a historic context or theme. This particular property has excellent integrity. There are minimal alterations to the property. The carriage house was converted into a living space and so the carriage doors were slightly altered and a rear patio has been added in the 1990s. However, overall, it retains a very good integrity and all seven aspects of integrity. This particular property relates to the history, having a direct and substantial association with a person who had influence on society. The property was constructed in 1899 by William Seward Iliffe. He was a prominent Denver businessman. He was involved in railroads, irrigation and a variety of ventures throughout Denver in the state of Colorado. He is also very well known for being a benefactor of you in the I Left School of Theology bears his name. He was important in providing financial backing to the I Left School of Theology NDU and was also in leadership roles in both schools, and he became a developer and booster for the South Denver area. He platted the university addition and then was a developer and buyer and seller to help both support his own business as well as to support the university. He lived in the building from 1890 to 1946 until when he passed. The property also is significant for its architecture. It embodies embodies the distinguishing characteristic of the architectural type of the Denver Square. Constructed in 1890, its early transition from the Victorian era. And the designs that were a little fuzzier with Victorian to a little more stripped down and classical elements on this particular building. It's a very substantial square building. However, it's a there are two buildings and there a little offset on this property. Unlike the more typical Denver squares that you see in an urban environment, which is a smaller or slightly more narrow building. This has the quintessential hipped roof with the central dormer. It has broad over extending eaves, the wider windows, which are typical of a Denver square versus something like a Victorian. And then it has a full width porch that wraps a little bit, which is the full width porches typical of a Denver square, and it has very classical detailing and the dental moldings, the porch columns and the coining on the edges of the building. Landmark staffing. The LPC also found that this property is significant for its geography, for promoting an understanding and appreciation of the urban environment by means of distinctive physical characteristics and rarity, and found that it met it under both. This building is one of the oldest in the area. This particular photo is taken in about 1900 in the property at 2145, South Adams is actually just to the right and outside of the frame of this. But it does show about a year after this was constructed what it looked like in that particular area. And so there this is one of the oldest in the building, the oldest in the area. There are very minimal changes to this building in comparison to the other buildings that exist from this time period. And so it's a very rare building for the area, and it also reflects the distinctive physical characteristics of the time that it was built. It has a very pastoral setting. There are nine lots that go along with this particular designation application. And so it sort of it reflects sort of a residential enclave of when this I mean, this was constructed different from the urban downtown core. And it really right now is differentiated from the smaller lots that are there from later development as well as the recent infill that has occurred. And finally, in order to be a Denver landmark, a property must relate to a historic context or theme. This very strongly relates to the development and growth of South Denver. Specifically, I live platting of University Edition, his work and his family's work developing and selling in that particular area. And then, William, I left a role in the development of due and I left school of theology. Landmark staff in the Landmark Preservation Commission found that it maintained its historic and physical integrity, that it met the criteria under history, architecture and geography and related to a historic context or theme in Denver history. And the LPC voted unanimously to approve this and recommended it going forward. Can answer any questions. Great. Thank you, Carol. All right. We have six speakers. All right, Madam Secretary. Yes. We have six speakers. I'm going to call the first. I call all six of them. Any Levinsky, Rosemarie Stouffer, Janet Bardwell, Matt Wester, Edward Doty and Joyce Meyers. Please come up and any Levinsky, you're up first. All right. Good evening, members of council. I'm Andy Levinsky. I'm the executive director of Historic Denver, located at 1420 Ogden Street. We're a nonprofit organization founded in 1970 and supported by more than 800 current members. And it's our mission to enhance the city's unique identity through education, advocacy and stewardship on behalf of our local heritage and historic places. And we're thrilled to be here tonight in support of the individual landmark designation for 2145 South Adams, also known as the Isle of House or Armley. We have been aware of this property for many years. In fact, it was featured on a historic Denver House tour in the 1980s. But our recent involvement is the result of the dedication and passion of the home's owner, Mrs. Rita Hill. Mrs. Hill and her late husband, Robert, purchased the Iola family home in 1967. They were both Denver natives and had deep roots in the community, and they were seeking a permanent home for their growing family. The Hills raised their eight children on Adams Street, and it's only the second owners of the house. They were great stewards and maintained the home's integrity and special character over the decades. Mrs. Hill reached out to us last year and again over the summer to seek assistance in honoring and protecting her home of more than 50 years . I provided you with a transcription of an oral history interview with Mrs. Hill by email last week, and that interview was done late last summer, and I hope you enjoyed reading it because it's a great story with a lot of really interesting threads about how Denver has grown and changed. But because Mrs. Hill couldn't be here tonight for health reasons. I did want to paraphrase how she explained her desire to have her home designated in this way. Rita said, I have loved living here in University Park in my younger years. I didn't think that I was I don't think I was aware of history and historic designation. But my years of the historical society really opened up my eyes to that. I realized it was a responsibility that we do something with this house. I was worried about it being scraped and I feel a lot of responsibility for it. And it's land. It was really given to us in amazing ways and I would like to give it back in the same condition to ensure its preservation with the blessing of Mrs. Hill and the financial support of the University Park Community Council , our organization hired a consultant to research and write the nomination, and they did a beautiful job documenting the tremendous history of this House and its association, not just as a visual landmark of South Denver, but as a reminder of the Iliff family, a family that left a legacy in Denver through its support of the EU and the idea of school of theology. We are proud to be supporting this with Mrs. Hill and to have shepherded this designation through the landmark process. So on behalf of historic Denver and our Board of Trustees, as well as all of Denver's residents, I want to thank Mrs. Hill and her late husband and her children for this opportunity to hold on to an important piece of Denver history, a place that helps make Denver the Denver we all love. I'm happy to answer any questions you may have about the application, and I hope you too appreciate the value this designation will bring to our community by voting and support this evening. Thanks for your consideration. All right. Thank you. All right, Rosemary Stovall. My name is Rosemary Stoffel and I live at 2275 South Monroe Street in University Park. I'm thrilled to be here today on behalf of University Park Community Council and myself to support this application under the very best of circumstances. A homeowner who took the steps to initiate the process, the recognition of one of the most important homes and properties in University Park. And finally, some good news for our neighborhood, which has seen an alarming loss of historic homes in recent years. The owner, Rita Hill, contacted neighborhood board members after reading about one of these homes being demolished. She wanted to make sure this wouldn't happen to the Hill family home, which they unoccupied since 1967. Rita's unable to be here tonight, but I know you're watching Rita. Hi, Rita. And hopefully by the end of the evening, you'll finally be getting that official Denver historic landmark plaque on your house. We immediately started working with historic Denver to get the process going, and our neighborhood board agreed to fund the research and completion of the application form. Here is an opportunity to preserve one of the very most recognizable homes in our neighborhood. Built in 1899 by William Seward. I live in Alberta. Blum Iliff. It as noted in the application, it is a familiar anchor in our neighborhood evoking the character of University Park in 1899 as a residential enclave. It sits on 33,000 square feet, which has nine lots pastoral site and is one of the oldest unaltered houses in our neighborhood. The ILA family history is entwined with the university with the development of the University Park. Do you and the city. And one of Rita's goals was to ensure that the Isla family's story is told again. The message I would most like to convey today is to express gratitude to Rita Hill and her family for being wonderful stewards of this home and property and for giving this tremendous gift to our neighborhood and to the city, in Rita's words . I feel a lot of responsibility for this house and land, as Annie has already said. I want to give it back in the same condition to ensure its preservation. I hope you agree and give this application your unanimous support. Before I end, before and I'd like to ask Carolyn here to please raise your hand. Carol is here in support of the application. And she and her husband, Don, have been very long time preservation advocates in our neighborhood and in the city. Their experience has been invaluable to those of us working in the trenches today. Rita's house is included in university walking tours book, which Don Edgar wrote in 1974. If any of you want some really good reading. Thank you. Thank you, Moustafa. All right, Janet Bardwell. Hello. I'm Janet Bardwell. I live at 2201 South Harrison Street in University Park. So I grew up in University Park. I live in my childhood home, and my great grandparents came to Denver before the house that is under consideration. So I dearly love this city. And I, over a year ago was riding my bike around the neighborhood and went down Adams Street and saw this house. And I got off my bike and I looked and like, I have never seen this before and I've never seen it in Denver where there's a house that's on its original land and just kind of this. People have used the word pastoral and it is quite a marvel in how it is positioned and still there. And so I went to the next University Park Community Council meeting and said, Do you guys know about this? This is really special. And then as everyone's described before me, the process went, but it is a very special place and our neighborhood has gone through profound transformation. So having this designated would be significant. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Miss Burwell. Matt Wester. Good evening. My name is Matt Webster. I live at. 2174 South Columbine. Thanks for entertaining us here at the end of a long, long day. And of all the decisions that you face, this is an easy one to me. Hit the. Pillow. Feel good about this? Two reasons. Number one, literally, this is an 89 year old woman who's. Passing away and this is her dying wish. Let this house stay. Let this history say. The second reason why is I think it sends the right message to this neighborhood at the right time regarding the importance of community and. Preservation, especially in the University Park area houses. There's a lot of houses. Houses have people. People are a community and community needs things like this. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Wester. Edward Doty. Thank you. Council President. Good evening. My name is Edward Duty and I'm a University Park resident as well. Live at 2131 South Combine. I would like to thank you in advance for your perspective. Support to designate the only property in our neighborhood as a historic landmark. Gormley is truly a neighborhood gem and deserving of such status. There is still much work to do to help us preserve more of our neighborhood and unique community. In the four years I have lived in University Park, I have witnessed the demolition of many structures of historic and architectural significance, including the 1898 Victorian home that was directly across the street from my house and moved to University Park for its connection to you, for its stately old homes, for its majestic and mature trees, and for the sense of community and shared history in our neighborhood. As an example, the previous owner of my house was Dr. Maurice Schubert, a Du Berkeley professor who lived to be 100 years old in the house. He was an avid, of all things ice skater and head as his ice ice skating partner. Candidly, Condoleezza Rice, when she was at the You Morris, was also one of the founders of the Denver Botanic Gardens, played a pivotal role and in the plans to beautify Buchtel Boulevard on the north edge of University Park in such are the threads of history that we cherish in our neighborhood. Our community currently feels like it's under siege by real estate developers seeking to turn the neighborhood into just another suburb of look alike homes. Among the first casualties are the beautiful tall trees cut down by the dozens, if not the hundreds, to make way for enlarged footprint foundations. As a banker, I understand the need for growth, but there can and should be more balance between development and preserving a great neighborhood such as University Park. My neighbors and I are here tonight to show our support for the formerly landmark designation and to let you know that we are organizing to do more to preserve the community we love. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Lastly, Joyce Meyers. Thank you. My name's Joyce Meyers. I live at 2180 South Adams Street, and I just wanted to say a few words. I have. The honor and privilege. Of living across the street from from this beautiful. Home. And that is why I bought the house that I live in. Who wouldn't want to live across the street from a park in this beautiful redstone mansion? You know? So I just want to thank. You for your consideration of making this a historic landmark. It is significant to the University Park neighborhood and to our community. Thank you. Yeah, thank you, Miss Myers. All right. We're done with our public comment and now into questions by members of council. Councilman Espinosa, I don't know if anybody can answer this, but hopefully you do, because my decision almost hinges on this. What is the name warmly mean? Where does it come from? What is that all about? I know it was on the house. I get that. But. Who stuck it up there and why. I think I can only partially so hopefully will still get your vote. Alberta Bloom Iliff, the first the wife of the first owner of the house, chose it all warmly. But we do not have a detailed explanation of why she chose it. Okay. I dare everybody on council to Google the word armley. There is nothing out there and it's so oddball of a name that you can actually still buy. Wormley dot com. It's available. All right. Once you finish those on your comments. Thanks. All right. Any other questions for members of the council? All right. Public order for 215 is now closed. Councilman Cashman, start us off with comments, please. Thank you, Mr. President. I want to thank landmark staff. Kara, thank you for your good work on this. And I want to thank them this levinsky and historic Denver I really enjoyed. I'm so glad you did that. Oral history. You know, I have not had the pleasure of meeting Miss Hill, but I feel like I have. And I especially like the stories. I don't know how many of my colleagues read the entire history, but apparently her husband, Robert, wasn't crazy about the house and she sold him on it. And it sounds like he fell in love with it equally along the way. It is a great history and I want to thank Rosemary Stafford for her ongoing efforts at guiding historic preservation in the University Park area. I believe it was an article that Rosemary wrote about a property that was lost that stimulated Miss Hill's attention once again to getting this property designated. I also loved the fact that this was not a a grand palace where huge social gatherings were the focus. This was a place where kids lived, where a family was raised. And I mean, virtually one short of a ball team, you know, one short of a baseball team through the years. And I just have wonderful images of what I'm sure were wonderful holidays and lots of good times on that property. Nine lots. Nine lots in one of the. Many lovely neighborhoods in Denver, but I would dare say was still one of the loveliest and most historic. And I hope read I hope you're listening because it was from her. Interview. I want to give it back in the same way. To ensure its preservation that this is a gift to to the community. Unlike many that that I've seen before and I want to extend my personal appreciation for that gift. I mean, those who choose to to designate a historic property benefit from it in any number of ways, be it. The tax credits are available for renovations or maintenance and so on, but this will remain this large parcel in this gorgeous home will remain part of our community in perpetuity. And, you know, we've I know my my friend, Councilman Flynn, in his attention to history, I think it would be awfully hard to find a place that better meets that criteria with the Isle of Family that, you know, I knew of their name attached to to do you and the School of Theology long before I became aware of the existence of this home. I'm just thrilled to death that this has come before council and. Oh, excuse me. I shall spend some time Googling grimly and hope to come with a few more hints of what it what it might mean. But I will wholeheartedly support this and read. I hope you're having a good evening. I hope you're watching. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilman Cashman. Councilman Espinosa. Yeah. I'm thinking that it just goes down in Denver law and we may never know. And but now it's there, preserved for future generations to question in the same way and also never know the. I keep telling myself that maybe it was one of my losses in my district that maybe was the trigger. And maybe I'll still. I feel better about having endured that. I just want it. Since you said that Rita was watching Rita. I just want to thank you. It's a wonderful house. You've been an incredible steward because we can tell it's self evident just looking at it. And so with its incredible history and your stewardship, it is here now for this act to make to make this act very easy. So thank you for voluntarily entering into this application and preserving this important piece of your neighborhood for your all generations to follow. So thank you. All right. Thank you, Councilman Espinosa. Councilman Nu. Thank you, Mr. President. I look forward to supporting this as well. And what a gorgeous home this is in this beautiful neighborhood. You know, University Park, it's is the thing that just just. Amazes me is we don't know the name of the architect. You know, it's such a beautiful, designed home. And, you know, you think of some prominent name would pop up immediately. Maybe you said name that's. On the house. We're trying to figure out maybe spelled backwards. Maybe that's his name. Or something or something. Unusual. Anyway, thank you for bringing this. Forward and. We look forward to supporting it. All right. Thanks. Thanks, Councilman. New Councilman Cashman, back up. Thank you, Mr. President. One one detail. I think one of the people I might have neglected to offer my thanks to the the Hill family, you know, the the the children. A piece of property like this comes up. Apparently, there there were not. While not having been privy to intimate conversations sounds like the the the offspring wholeheartedly wholeheartedly support this as well. And it's a gift from them, hopefully for years to come. They'll be able to drive by the family home and remember many, many good times there as well. We struggle with people with responsibility for pieces of property like this who chose nothing but pure profit over a sense of community responsibility and pride. So thanks again to the entire Hill family. Thank you. Anytime, Councilman Cashman. Anytime you want to talk about something in your district. Can I go. On? Yes, please. We do have Councilman s. Okay. I typed it in wrong. Okay, great. In closing, I'll just say Ms.. Rita Hill, how you doing? Are you watching right now? We so glad that this is getting done. Want to say hi to you? And I want to thank all you all for your advocacy. I appreciate it. And I want to say this because I think we live in such a black, white world of four against. But I do believe that revitalization and preservation can coexist. And this is another splendid area of town that's changing. There's all kinds of stuff, but I love that there's preservation going on in this area as well. And so I'm wholeheartedly supportive. And it's folks like you that make Denver great. So thank you for preserving your community. All right. And with that, Madam Secretary, Brokaw. Cashman can eat. LOPEZ All right, you. Ortega. SUSSMAN Black. Eye. Clark. Hi. Espinosa. Hi. Flynn, I. Herndon. Mr. President. I. I. Please close the voting. Announce results. 12 Eyes.

AS AMENDED a bill for an ordinance to amend Chapter 59 (Zoning) of the Denver Revised Municipal Code relating to the Denver Zoning Code and to amend and restate the Denver Zoning Code. Amends the Zoning Code with multiple substantive, clarification, and usability amendments in response to customer and community feedback, industry changes, and other factors. Amended 5-14-18 to fix a misprint in the bill by including the Code Effective Date in Section 3 as similarly cited throughout the remainder of the bill. The Committee approved filing this bill at its meeting on 4-10-18.

DenverCityCouncil_05142018_18-0323

Thank you. Now, I'll do a recap on the resolutions. No items have been called out under bills for introduction. Those items have been called out under bills for final consideration. No items have been called out under pending. Councilwoman Sussman has called out for a Technical Amendment Council Bill 8.0323, which amends the zoning code. Madam Secretary, can you please put that item up on our screens? And, Councilwoman Blackwell, you put Council Bill 323 on the floor. Yes, I move that council bill 18, dash zero 3 to 3 be taken out of order. It has been moved and seconded. Madam Secretary, roll call. SUSSMAN All right. Black I. Flynn. I Fillmore. I Herndon. I Cashman. Lopez. I knew Ortega. Hi, Mr. President. Hi. Madam Secretary, please close voting. Announce the results. Tonight. Ten eyes comfortable. 323 may be taken out of order. Councilwoman Sussman, your motion to amend. I move that council bill 1803 to 3 be amended in the following particulars on page four, line ten strike. Fill in and replace with May 24th, 2018. It has been moved and seconded. Any questions by members of council? All right. Any comments by members of Council Councilwoman Sussman? Thank you, Mr. President. This amendment fixes a misprint in the bill by including the code of effective date in Section three, as similarly cited throughout the remainder of the bill. If the amendment passes, it will not require a delay in the scheduled public hearing. Thank you, Councilwoman Sussman. Seeing no other comments, Madam Secretary. Roll call. Sussman Black eye. Flynn, I Gillmor. Herndon. Cashman. Lopez. I knew Ortega, I. Mr. President. I. Madam Secretary, please cast voting in no results tonight. Tonight's Council Bill 323 has been amended. Final consideration of amended council bill 323, which with its public hearing, will be Monday, May 21st. That concludes the items to be called out. All their bills for introduction are ordered published. We're now ready for the block vote on resolutions and bills on final consideration. Council members remember that this is a consent or block vote and that you will need to vote. Otherwise, this is your last chance to call an item out for a separate vote. All right, Councilwoman Black, will you please, for the resolutions for adoption and the bills on final consideration for final passage on the floor? Yes, Mr. President, I move that resolutions be adopted and bills on final consideration be placed upon final consideration, and do pass in the block for the following items. All Series 18 019904040430043104320433043404350389042004110426008703970403. 02820395040004130414. And that's it. All right, Madam Secretary, it looks like we got them all. Do you concur? Yes, Mr. President. All right. It has been moved and seconded. Madam Secretary. Roll call. Black eye Flynn. I could go more. I turned in Cashman. Lopez. I knew Ortega. I assessment. Hi, Mr. President, I. I'm secretary. Please. Cause voting in Nassau results tonight. Tonight, the resolutions have been adopted and bills have been placed upon final consideration and do pass. Tonight there will be a required public hearing on Council Bill 325, changing the zoning classification for 2391 South Sherman Street in Rosedale.

On message and order, referred on February 2, 2022, Docket #0223, authorizing the City of Boston to accept and expend the amount of Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($250,000.00) in the form of a grant for the FY22 Municipal ADA Improvement Grant Program, awarded by the Massachusetts Office on Disability to be administered by the Commission for Persons with Disabilities, the Committee submitted a report recommending that the order ought to pass.

BostonCC_02022022_2022-0223

Number 0223 message. In order authorizing the city of Boston to accept and expand the amount of $250,000 in the form of a grant for the fiscal year. 22 Municipal A.D.A. Improvement Grant Program awarded by the Massachusetts Office on Disability to be administered by the Commission for Persons with Disabilities. The grant will fund the installation of a vertical lift to the third floor mezzanine. Thank you, Mr. Clarke. DAWKINS zero 2 to 3 will be referred to the Committee on City Services, Innovation Technology. At this time, I would like to stop counsel for. You have your hand up. Just on the next docket. Mr. President, I'd like to move a suspension and passage after you read it into the record. Thank you, counsel. Clarity. Mr. Clarke, please read docket 0224 place.

A bill for an ordinance renaming Northside Park located at 1400 53rd Avenue as “Carpio-Sanguinette Park” Renames Northside Park as the Carpio-Sanguinette Park located at 1400 53rd Avenue in Council District 9. The Committee approved filing this bill at its meeting on 9-12-17.

DenverCityCouncil_09252017_17-0984

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks for considering that. I appreciate that. Now we'll do a quick recap on a resolution that nothing has been called out under bills for introduction. Councilman Ortega has called out Council Bill 984 regarding the renaming of Northside Park as Carpio saying Gwinnett Park for a request under bills for final consideration. North has been called out on a pending. Nothing has been called out, Madam Secretary. Make sure I got that right for everybody. Great. Madam Secretary, please put up 984. Go ahead, Councilwoman Ortega. Mr. President, I would like to request a one hour courtesy public hearing on final consideration. So that would be next week, Monday, October the second, on this park naming. Okay. Great. Thank you. Councilman Ortega, on Monday, October 2nd, if there are no objections by members of council, there will be a one hour courtesy public hearing. Oh 984 regarding the renaming of Northside Park as the Carpio Sanguinary Park. Okay, this concludes our items to be called out. All other bills for introductions are now order publish. We're now ready for the block votes on resolutions and bills for final consideration. Council members remember this is a consent or block vote and you will need to vote. Otherwise, this is your last chance to call out an item on a separate vote. Councilman Flynn, will you please put the resolution for adoption and the bills on final consideration and final passage on the floor? Yes, Mr. President. Thank you. I move that resolutions be adopted and the bill on final consideration be placed upon final consideration and do pass in a block for the following items. All series of 2017. 958 959 967 996. 1002 1003 nine 9997 1000 982. Thank you. Let's just make sure you did your. Eye. Checked. Okay. Did you hold on? Let me double check. It looks good. Okay. It has been moved and seconded. Madam Secretary, roll call. Black Clerk Espinosa. Hi, Flynn. I Gillmor. I heard in question. Hi. I Lopez. I knew. Ortega. Hi. Mr. President. I. Please. I was voting. And now the results. 13 eyes. 13 eyes. The resolutions have been adopted on the bill and the bills have been placed upon final consideration and do pass tonight. There will be required public hearing on Council Bill 903 designating the Peck Peck Packard's Hill Historic District.

A proclamation congratulating the Denver St. Patrick’s Day Parade Committee on the Occasion of the 52nd Annual Parade on March 15, 2014

DenverCityCouncil_03102014_14-0042

All right. We are going to move forward to the council proclamation for to congratulating the Denver St Patrick's Day parade coming on the occasion of their 52nd annual parade and sponsored by Councilwoman Monteiro. Will you please read Proclamation 42? Thank you, Mr. President. Proclamation number 400 for two congratulating the Denver St Patrick's Day Parade Committee on the occasion of the 52nd Annual Parade on March 15th, 2014. And it reads. Whereas Denver has one of the largest St Patrick's Day parade in the United States and the largest parade west of the Mississippi. And. Whereas, this year the theme is Sweet Home Colorado, which pays tribute to the citizens by birth or the citizens by transplant. We all share one love for our great state that we call home. And. WHEREAS, the Denver St Patrick's Day parade exemplifies how diverse people can gather together with a glance at the past and a look to the future while enjoying the pipe and drum bands, Irish step dancing and honoring all divisions of our military to the delight of over 200,000 spectators. Whereas, congratulations and thanks to all volunteers of the Denver St Patrick's Day Parade Committee, including many who have passed on but are still remembered for their endless hours and never ending commitment , which makes this celebration possible. And. Whereas, we hope the Colorado Sun and the Mile High Air lifts the spirits of all who march or watch the 52nd Annual Parade this Saturday, March 15th, 2014. And we hope for a warm wind at our backs as we celebrate. Now, therefore, he had proclaimed by the counsel of the city and county of Denver, Section one, that the Council hereby congratulates the Denver St Patrick's Day Parade, a volunteer organization on a well-organized, peaceful and spirited gathering at the 52nd annual event. Section two that the Clerk of the city and County of Denver shall attest and affixed the seal of the city and county of Denver to this proclamation, and that a copy be transmitted transmitted to Dan Lagrange, president of the Denver St Patrick's Day Committee. Thank you, Councilwoman Martel. Your motion to adopt. Thank you, Mr. President. I move that proclamation 40 to be adopted. It has been moved and second hand comments by members of Council Counsel Monteiro. Thank you, Mr. President. This is such an exciting part of the city's history. Every. Every year. So we have the holidays and then, you know, there's a little bit of a slump there. And then it's time for National Western. And then there's a little bit of a slump there. And now it's time for the Saint Patrick's Day parade. And the weather is so beautiful today, so it couldn't be more fitting. But I want to say that this committee is a charitable organization with all committed volunteers. Each member I've noticed has a deep love for the Irish culture and enjoys sharing that sense of pride with the entire Denver community. With year round effort culminating with the Parade Parade Day event in 1972, over 30,000 people watch the parade. The temperature was a balmy 71 degrees. This was the first time the parade claimed it was the second largest, second only to New York City Thursday prior to the parade. Mayor Hancock and myself would join the parade committee in renaming YRC Street, where it crosses 17th Street to Tooley Street in honor of Dale Tully, our former district attorney for Denver and a longtime supporter of the parade. The parade marshals have the task to stage thousands of people, all in order in just 3 hours. That's deal with horses. Bands lost kids and trees as large as 50 vehicles. Elected officials, VIP's and just about every kind of culture, military organization and dancing organization. Their day starts at 6 a.m. and does not stop until the staging lot is cleared. Planning takes nearly a year, and yet they do what they do with love. The 2014 grand marshal is John Chandler, who is awarded the 2000 2009 Spur Award for the best song from the Western Writers of America for his song, Linwood. He was also named 2009 Best Living Western Musician by True With Magazine. So, Mr. President, it's with my honor to sponsor this proclamation and ask for support from my colleagues as well. Thank you, Councilwoman Monteiro. Councilman Nevitt. Thank you, Mr. President. I don't know why Councilwoman Monteiro got that cool looking beret, and I'm wearing that, but that's okay. We're all Irish on St Patrick's Day. This event is always. Always in. 30 seconds. It'll be on Facebook. You know. This event is always is always fun. And the the committee does a fantastic job putting it, not just putting. It together, but also making it an occasion where everyone. Is brought together. Denver's a diverse city. And. All its diversity is. Represented at the St Patrick's Day parade, which is very cool. There's also a lot of. Remembered. At the St Patrick's Day parade. And, you know, someone like. Dave Dale truly gets remembered. But I would never. Want to forget one of the city and county's own Walt. Becker, who was a. So that's it. Mr. President, I just wanted to. Remember Uncle Walt. Thank you, Councilman. Do we have any other comments from members of council seen on Mr. Secretary? Roll call? Montero I. Never I. Trump I covered. I'm proud, i. But I. Lemon Lopez. All right. The president. Hi. Councilman Rob. So hanging fire. And that is it. Mr. Secretary, please call the voting and announce the results tonight. As Ernie and I, the resolution has been proclamation excuse me, has been adopted. Councilman Montero. I do not see anybody here. Is there anybody you want to call for, Father? Thank you, Mr. President. Accepting the proclamation will be Theresa miller. No. Did I say right? Miller, Rog? No. The public relations chair. And please feel free to bring up other members of the committee to accept this proclamation. And, Diane, you're welcome to. Come on. Thank you, Mr. President, and members of our council, and especially Councilwoman Monteiro. I'd like to introduce you to some amazing people. Our board of Directors for the Parade Committee, whose leadership has seriously inspired close to 300 people whose dedication is unwavering. To put the best parade on the streets of Denver for the citizens of Colorado, and I'd like to have all of our board members please stand. And now I'd like to introduce to you a woman who actually her mother in law was one of the original parade organizers in Denver. And how it happened was her husband, Buck Lagrange, invited her to a meeting long ago and she said, okay, I'll go, but don't ask me to do anything. And now she's the president of the largest parade west of the Mississippi, gathering people and accomplishing amazing things for our city. And her mother in law, no longer with us, but with us in spirit, would be so very proud of the work that you've done. Mrs. Diane Lagrange. Thank you very much. Mr. President, City Council members. We gratefully accept this proclamation and thank you for support of the Denver St Patrick's Day Parade Committee throughout our 52 year history . There are over 300 volunteers who have invested thousands of hours yearlong to bring this event to the streets of Denver. We expect over 250,000 spectators coming together on parade day to celebrate the Irish culture. Our theme, Sweet Home Colorado pays tribute to all of us who call Colorado home. And I am a second generation Coloradoan. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you once again. So much. And thank you, Councilwoman Monteiro, for bringing that. We're looking forward to that at the end of the week. We are now ready for their resolutions. Mr. Secretary, will you please read the resolutions from Health, Safety, Education and Services?

Message and order authorizing the City of Boston to accept and expend the amount of Eighty Four Thousand Nine Hundred Eighteen Dollars ($84,918.00) in the form of a grant for the FY21 Port Security, awarded by the United States Department of Homeland Security to be administered by the Police Department. The grant will fund BPD Harbor Patrol Unit vessels and equipment.

BostonCC_09222021_2021-1002

Docket 1002 message in order authorizing City of Boston to accept and expand the amount of $84,918 in the form of a grant for the FBI. 21/4 security awarded by the United States Department of Homeland Security to be administered by the police department. The grant will fund Vpd Harbor Patrol Unit vessels and equipment. The Journal recognizes Councilor Andrea Campbell, chair of the Committee on Public Safety and Criminal Justice Chair. Campbell, the floor is yours. Thank you, President O'Malley. As a chair of the Committee on Public Safety and Criminal Justice. I am seeking suspension of the rules and passage of Docket 1002. It's pretty self-explanatory. It's in the amount of $84,918. It's a grant that we get consistently and continually. I think sometimes the department would like more resources, but it's of course to protect our ports, port security. But it's a relatively small amount to purchase certain types of vessels and equipment. We'd like to get it to the department as soon as possible. Thank you. Thank you very much. Councilor Andre Campbell, chair of the Committee on Public Safety and Criminal Justice, seeks suspension of the rules and passage of Docket 1002. All those in favor, please indicate by saying I oppose. Now the ayes have it. Docket 1002 has passed. Madam Clerk, would you now please read Docket 1003.

Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by amending Section 6.16.085 and by adding Section 6.16.062 all relating to animal regulation, read and adopted as read. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_03102015_15-0115

Item 17 is a report from Parks, Recreation, Marine and City Attorney. Recommendation to declare ordinance amending Title six of the Long Beach Municipal Code to make it mandatory for dog owners to spay neuter their pets unless they possess a medical exclusion or exemption. And to prohibit the sale of dogs. Cat. Or rabbits in any pet shop retail business or other commercial establishments unless they were obtained from an animal shelter. Humane Society. Rescue organizations operate on the premises, possessing a valid breeding permit rate the first time and later. Witness Regular meeting of the City Council for final reading. Mr. Chaplin. Or is it? Mr. Stevens. Thank you, Madam Vice President, Vice Mayor and member of City Council. I'm going to turn this over to Ted Stevens, who is our Animal Care Services Bureau manager. Good evening and thank you, vice mayor and council members. So I'm just going to give you a brief presentation on the ordnance that you have before you. Back in November of 2014, the city council asked the city manager and city attorney to come back with the ordinance for mandatory spay neuter of dogs and to restrict the sale of dogs, cats and rabbits in pet shops. And so I'll be speaking on that tonight. So what we're proposing is for a mandatory spay neuter ordinance to become effective on October 1st, 2015. This would allow residents to have an opportunity to come into compliance, give them a little grace, period. We're proposing that all dogs must be spayed or neutered by six months of age unless exempted. And it's important to note that we already have a mandatory spay neuter for cats. And cats are at four months of age. And we've had this since 2010. So some of the benefits of this is we believe that this will help with pet overpopulation. It's not a panacea, a cure all, but it is another tool in our tool belt to help with the fighting, the pet overpopulation problem. We believe that there is a benefit to public safety. Some studies have shown, and according to the ASPCA, that spay and neuter dogs may be less likely to bite and less likely to roam freely. We believe that there is a benefit to the health of dogs. Obviously with any surgery, there's always some some minor risk. But I think the consensus is that it's generally an easy, safe procedure and the health benefits greatly outweigh the risks. One retro retrospective study of over 40,000 dogs showed that sterilization increased the life expectancy by 13.8% in male dogs and over 26% in female dogs. And there is still a medical exemption available and that I'll be discussing in a later time. So just one more thing on the benefits of spay and neuter. This is from the American Veterinary Medical Association website, and this is quoted from them. It says Altered pets make better companion animals by reducing the incidence of many undesirable behaviors, such as heat cycles, roaming, marking aggression. Many of these behaviors lead to people surrendering their pets to animal shelters. The procedure has no effect on a pet's intelligence or ability to learn, play, work or hunt. Most pets tend to be better behaved following surgical removal of their ovaries or testes, making them more desirable companions. So I mentioned the exemptions earlier. One of the biggest exemptions is the medical exemption, and this can be permanent or temporary. Basically, the medical exemptions are an animal that is incapable of breeding for whatever reason. The other would be that the animal was not suited for surgery and that the surgery would be likely to cause death or aggravate any conditions. And so these are exemptions that are made for medical. They be certified by a veterinarian. We also have exemptions for law enforcement, search and rescue or service animals or animals that are bred for these purposes. And we also have an exemption for certified show dogs and competition or herding dogs or breeding stock for these purposes. And it's important to note that we do not have an exemption, does not require that the show dogs are actively participating in shows, which is a restriction that's found in a lot of other cities that for various reasons we felt that was maybe a little too strict. And we tried to make it as open as we could for the for the certified show dogs. And all of these require documented proof. So as far as the implication of this goes, we're proposing some additional moneys, $5,000 to help with our education, public education outreach. We're looking to increase our spay neuter voucher program by $30,000. You know, we have a lot of great partners and some of them are here tonight. Services such as Fix, Long Beach, Friends of Long Beach Animals and just some of our other partners that we deal with on a daily basis that help reach out to the people that need financial assistance with getting surgeries done. There are low cost clinics available. Golden State, snip, L.A. and some others that are out there. We've already started researching and looking for grant opportunities and other partnerships where we can bring in more funds from the outside to help with our providing that financial assistance. And as far as the enforcement piece goes. We're looking to add one part time license inspector to help just dealing with the with especially the initial part of it getting the the current unaltered animals, getting them in compliance. And it's important, though, that our enforcement is really geared towards education and warnings and providing vouchers and and low cost opportunities rather than citations. Citations are there if we need them. But it's really not our focus. Our focus is more about getting compliance and helping the individual pet owners and not coming down on them with the hammer . Some fiscal and fiscal impact things to be. We have a potential or we have we have a lost revenue as a result of the differential between the unaltered license fee of $95 and the alter license fee of $20. And that's estimated to be around 187,000. We have our implement and implementation costs that were in the previous slide that came out to about $56,000. And these costs could be or will be recovered through possibly through an increase in licensing fees, an $8 increase to the altar license fee from 20 to $28, which would increase the senior discounted altar license fee from 10 to $14 as they get a 50% discount. And there'll be a $10 increase to the unaltered license fee from 95 to $105 for the people that have the exemptions. And then we're anticipating the additional license canvasser to help bring in additional revenue as well. And so moving on to the next aspect, the restrict the sale of dogs, cats and rabbits at pet shops. We're basically proposing that no person or animal shop shall engage in the sale, barter, giving away or transferring of dogs, cats or rabbits unless the person or animal shop sells barters, gives away, or transfers dogs that are bred and reared within the city in compliance with Section 616 1900. And that is our breeding ordinance. Dogs, cats are rabbits that are obtained from a publicly operated animal shelter and or dogs, cats or rabbits obtained from a private, humane society or duly incorporated organization devoted to the rescue care and adoption of stray, managed or surrendered animals. And we will require a certificate of source for each animal that is displayed or sold at a pet shop. And this would also be effective. October 1st, 2015. And so that's it for my presentation. I'm available for questions. And if I may add, we want to thank Vice Mayor Sergio Lowenthal, who actually proposed this and took the lead on this. This is just one more tool for us. It's one more tool for us to reduce the euthanasia rates reduced to the pounds and it's much appreciated. Hopefully this will pass and we can, you know, continue our efforts to decrease the euthanasia rates and in mortgage. Thank you, George. And thank you, Ted. I wanted to. We have a motion and a second. I know many of you would like to speak. I just wanted to start off the conversation, if I may. We've started we started working together on this issue probably as early as 2007. While we're only addressing one aspect of this larger package of animal care reforms that many of you in the audience worked with us in the city and on the council to bring forward. I don't want us to lose sight of the fact that while this is incremental, it comes from a larger narrative and the larger narrative. You've already seen many installments come true. We were able to get a city veterinarian. We were able to get licensing. We were able to get lots of things that bring us to this point today. And to not finish this narrative, I think would be really a travesty. We've taken animal care in our city not as an issue by issue one particular item by one particular item, but really as that entire narrative. And it started with this city taking a really good look at what its role is when it comes to animal care. If you recall, not too long ago, we were our department was called Animal Control. And through an unfortunate situation, which we looked at as an opportunity to reinvent and rebrand ourselves as a compassionate city in this in this arena, we decided that the best name for our department was animal care. And I think you were in large part a very, very big part of us being able to do that. But that shifted our entire approach. This is one more way that we are fulfilling our aspiration of being the animal care city and councilmembers. I had stated earlier in our meeting in November, Long Beach has done a great deal to increase pet adoptions and decrease the number of dogs and cats euthanized over the last seven years. Mr. Stevens, do you recall the number of animals that we had euthanized in the last recorded year? Yes. I actually have that right here. The number of animals. Yes, total. Total. Was 4054. And that was in year 2013. 2014. Okay. Thank you. And for a city our size, that's a significant number. But we are able to say that we have, through increased pet adoptions, decrease the number of dogs and cats euthanized over the last seven years. However, we still have a real problem. That number is quite a bit less than what it used to be. I think I had read that it was about 21% less than a couple of years previous. Is that correct? It is over 1100 less than the previous year. And it's if you were to go back, if you were to go back seven years, it's about half, almost half, almost half. That's incredible. So we have done a great job in with you to educate as much as we can. And and while I believe that we must continue to educate, I also think there's a time when we have to stand up and do what is remaining. And this is what is remaining in order to capture the balance, the balance that we cannot capture with education alone. So we do still have a real problem with over with pet overpopulation. Knowingly or unknowingly, pet owners are contributing to our own overpopulation and it's become clear that we're not going to adopt our way out of this problem. We know that the vast majority of dogs selected or picked up by animal care services are unaltered, and that by reducing the number of animals being impounded, we can focus more resources and volunteer hours on adoptions, public outreach and mobile clinics, which we know all work. That said, I'd like to thank our staff for their commitment to initial warnings and education. Rather than heavy fines. And as you heard from Mr. Stevens today, our focus is still on education and not on fines. And I'm pleased to see a recommendation for more funding for the vouchers in support of our community partners. And I know many community partners are eager to see that as well, because the services are available and we must help people afford them. I also understand that our own spay and neuter clinic at Animal Care Services is close to up and running, being up and running, is that right? And that's very exciting. Finally, we've had a lot of support from various individuals, a couple of retired veterinarians, certainly, who've guided us through this entire process. I'd like to personally thank Dr. Larry Cosman, who is probably surprised that I'm calling him out, but he has been with me and my office since day one on this issue. That's probably the first few months after his retirement. So there's no rest for the weary. But I want to thank you for your commitment to this issue and really educating all of us on what the right direction is. There is no panacea, but there is a right direction and we have been moving in that direction for quite some time. Sometimes we don't get it 100% right, but we are always moving in the right direction. I think staff has done a great job of hearing the concerns from both sides of this issue and presenting us with exemptions for various types of dogs, whether they're part of a national or international organization. Service herding. We heard from a hurting last time supporting or even have a medical concern. Ultimately, my co-sponsors and I believe this ordinance is another measured step in our attempts to go from a reactive to a proactive system. And so before I turn this over, we have several speakers. I do have a few more questions. I'd like to know if by warnings if our warnings include some timetable for the resident to get their animal fixed before the fine is assigned. I know you would extended you mentioned a grace period. Yeah. I think our initial policy that we're looking at is probably 60 to 90 days and then we could provide extensions if they have, you know, circumstances beyond their control. We want to work with them and ultimately help them any way we can. We appreciate that. And are animal license inspectors able to provide vouchers out in the field while they're as part of their canvasing since they're already out there? Yes. Okay. And I also understand there are a few studies recommending that owners of large breed dogs wait until they're about 12 months of age to be spayed or neutered. Would this require a simple communication, a written notice from the veterinarian for an exemption? Yeah, we could. That would be something we definitely considered when we were trying to figure out the age. Six months was definitely the cut off we wanted to use. But we are aware that there are certain issues, like you said, with larger breed dogs and waiting until they're one years old, especially the males more than the females . And so we definitely had that medical exemption where the veterinarian could certainly give them a temporary exemption and allowed to wait until they're one year old. And that would not be a problem. When pet owners are licensing their pets, they identify the breed, correct. Would it be easier on the the pet owner if there were certain breeds that were identified as large breeds? Rather than asking for a medical exemption that we identify with in conjunction with vets, what those breeds might be? Is that a case that. We can do that? I think that would make it easier for the pet owner otherwise and easier for staff. You would not get the multitude of exemption requests. I think we like our big dogs in Long Beach. And finally, how do we handle unaltered dogs that are picked up by animal care but their owners come to reclaim them, which happens a lot. And I think it's important for us to know. I'm sure it's going to work. But how do we rate? How do we handle when we pick up dogs that are unaltered and then when their parents come to pick them up. Currently or after this ordinance or. Both? Well, currently they would come to redeem them. There is actually a penalty, a state penalty for an altered animals found at large. And in the future it would be if this were to pass, it would be simply the same way we would have come across. And this is probably how most of the enforcement would come about. Is the animal being impounded as we would? We would give them all the resources to get the get it done at a low cost or free somewhere. And then we would give them the same timeline, the warning, and work with them on the timeline to get that done. So we're still working through the education. Yes. Thank you, Councilmember Mongo. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Many of you know, the animal community is one that I am particularly attached to, having served as the budget manager for L.A. County Animal Control for several years. That agency in pounds 100,000 live animals a year and is one of the largest animal agencies in the world. And so the changes that we're able to make here that make a difference in the lives of the animals in Long Beach are really, really important to me. With that, I will pass it along to some of my colleagues because I've queued up later in the queue. Okay. Councilmember Andrews? Yes. Thank you, vice mayor. You know, I think the individuals who are in the audience, you know, for the shortness, I think you can see our vice mayor has compassion when she speaks about this, because the fact that I just heard her say. The dogs that are lost and when their parents come pick them up. So if you choose care, that is going to show you that this is your kid. So. And one of my main concerns, of course, is the cost and spreading of nutrition. And, you know, the pet owner, you know, because we have a number of senior citizens and low income individuals in our city that have pets in their compassion. So I am pleased to see that the $30,000 voucher plan has been implemented and to help these individuals and truly, you know, will vote in favor of this item. Thank you. Just briefly, Councilmember Mungo. Councilmember Andrew, since you brought it up, I'm in some in-depth meetings with Director Stevens. We talked through that the cost of an unaltered animal license with a voucher is actually more expensive. So spay or neutering their pet would actually be less expensive in the long run. And as we get through the dialog, you'll see that I had some concerns about the cost of this program as well. And we have some ideas on how we can make sure that that's going to be good for the community and good for the Department of Animal Control, good for the city and good for the residents. Council member, Austin. Well, I'm encouraged. And when we when this issue first came before the council, I raised a number of concerns regarding the effectiveness of the messaging program. And I know there are many supporters out here. I thank you for coming down here. It does make a difference. I see your signs and I feel your your compassion and heart that you have for for for the animals that you you work with. Many of you work in our animal control. Center and you are part of rescue efforts and you adopt and you promote that. And so thank you, because you guys are making an impact on our city, our city in a big way, in an important way. But I do still do have some concerns mandatory. Anytime we say mandatory, it becomes very, very intrusive, in my opinion. I think this policy, as it's laid out, actually increases the burden on low income and communities that are not so advantaged. Communities of color. Where are the enforcement efforts going to be taking place? More and more, we're going to be talking about an agenda item later, talking about bending the box. And and we passed recently legislation to start decriminalizing a lot of things in society. And I think this actually goes in the other direction. I do have a couple of questions, and I raised these questions the last time, but I think it's important that we get these on the record from Animal Care Services. Mr. Stevens How many dogs are estimated currently in the city of Long Beach Total? Are there. And I'm speaking of dogs only. I know we're talking about dogs. Cats and. Rabbits tonight. Rabbit's estimation based on from the AVMA, they have kind of a formula that they use and total dogs in our community based on the population of the estimated 102,000. Okay. 102,000. And how many dogs currently are registered in the city of Long Beach? A little over 35,000. 35,000. So that's one third of the total dogs in the city of Long Beach. The register. And of that of the registered dogs. How many dogs are currently intact? Little over 3000. 3000. So that tells me that 90% of registered dogs in the city of Long Beach are spayed or neutered. We should be given ourselves a hand as a city because of that. I think that that's a plausible to our Animal Care Services Department, and I think I would applaud this. The city council councils before us who made these tough decisions to reduce the registration rates for for dogs that are spay neuter to to to offer such incentives for people to do that. I don't know that if we if we if we show a 90% registration rate, of course, being neutered, that a mandatory policy is actually even necessary. This is this is going to be a little costly. We had a budget exercise closed session, I mean, a study session last week that paints a very dim picture for for the future, the next couple of years of our budget. The the part the Parks, Recreation and Marine Department has experienced cuts in cuts and cuts there. Their budget hasn't grown over the last several years in any way. But yet we are going to with this action tonight decrease. Decrease funding in their budget. And ask for increased cost. That's going to be a budget exercise and it's going to be a values exercise for for this council moving forward. It's and these are not one time funds. This is a structural issue. This is this is this is these are structural dollars that are going to be committed here. I do. I do. Favor the restricting the sale of dogs and cats. I think that is absolutely fine. And you know if we want to truly reduce the the. The overpopulation of animals in our city. I think that is a noble effort. But to to say mandatory spending, neutering. I think the the the the the data shows in other cities where this has been done. That the the euthanasia rate has not necessarily been decreased. It's actually increased. It's created situations where people are no longer taking their dogs, dogs and cats to the veterinarian. Which which impacts the health of the animal. And and it creates a situation where people are more more or less open with with the city of Long Beach. I'm not sure that this is going to get us to the desired result that we're expecting. But, you know, I'm open to hearing from my my council colleagues and the rest of the public to see this. Councilmember Mongo. So. First, I want to agree with the things that Councilmember Austin said. I've had extended discussions and many of you have been to the parks meetings and the soccer field meetings where we've talked about that the Parks Department is significantly underfunded and thus, as a division of the Parks Department, animal care and Control. Animal Care and control subvention rate. I don't want to use dork terms of the budget, but they don't cover their own costs with the revenues that are coming in. And we are not in a position where we can increase the redemption fees because then people give up their animals and that's even worse for the system. And so taking this hit of $187,500 annually, if not more, would be a significant hit to the city. And so in talking a little bit with. The City Attorney's office and a colleague. I can't talk with too many colleagues that would violate Brown Act, but a colleague I've come up with some language that really mitigates the concerns of anyone who wrote an email. It still gets us into compliance. It rewards those who have been in compliance. And it. Enforces bad, enforces spay and neuter as a mandatory on people who have been non-compliant and or anyone who moves to the city or adopts or buys an animal. From this day forward. So what I propose is to add language, which I have been told is not significantly different, so it doesn't have to come back again that an unaltered dog or cat that has a valid I'm sorry, not cat or an unaltered dog that has valid license from Animal Care Services Bureau shall not be subject to this section under the license lapse unless the license lapses or expires and or October 1st, 2015, whichever occurs first. So let me tell you what that means, because that's a lot of legal mumbo jumbo. So I wrote it out in in normal terms. What that means is that 2500 responsible pet owners who have an unaltered pet who has never gotten out and never been caught by animal control services, can maintain their status with their unaltered license when that animal passes away and or any additional animals are brought into the home and or any animal that gets licensed after the October one date, which is when the ordinance becomes effective, it has to be spayed or neutered. There would be no unaltered option. And so what that does is it gradually brings in the policy. It makes it so we don't lose $187,000 in one year putting that burden on the city. It still gets us into 100% compliance within one life cycle, and I think that it's a reasonable way to go. How do we feel about that, Vice Mayor Lowenthal? I need to ask. I think I saw the city attorney motioning to speak. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Remember the council? Councilmember Mongo, if I understand your language, you're talking about an amendment to the draft ordinance, section d d sub paragraph two, and you would be changing the word expires to lapses, is that correct? So that. Yes, sir. So it would not be too significant. So it would be able to pass this evening? That's correct. But the effect of that change of that one word would allow a pet owner who keeps their license current to maintain their pet in its current condition indefinitely as well. If you miss a license renewal, you would lapse and then you would be forced to become spayed or neutered. So as long as you maintained your license in good standing, you would become okay. However, if your animal got out and got to the shelter, that would put you into that other category and therefore it would not. I'm sorry. That's correct. But the difference between as written and as your proposed changes, there is now an indefinite period of time in which the owner could, if they follow all the rules, could do that as it's currently written. The later of the two dates would be the expiration date of the current license or October of 2015. So I just want to make sure we're clear on what your proposed changes. Yes. I'm sorry, Mr. City Attorney. And she said whichever comes first. So sorry. Last. Okay. It would be later. Yes. So under that, there is a way, as the city attorney said, that families could avoid spay or neutering their animal as long as they kept their licenses current, which is not in the spirit of this item. Is that correct? Mr. City Attorney, that was your interpretation. The impact of that change? Yes, we did allow the current owner, as long as they follow the rules and pay their license, they would be able to maintain their animal in the current condition. So so that's a good point. It only applies to currently registered dogs, so it only applies to the responsible pet owners. None of us here today are after responsible pet owners. We're after the irresponsible pet owner. So that is what I was hoping was still within the spirit. I will hear from other council members, but I'm not in support of that at this time. She would figure from us of how we feel. Mr.. If I could ask Mr. Chapman or Mr. Stephens if you'd like to weigh in on the impact of that. So what we've been doing is not to create necessarily tears of responsibility or tears of, you know, the ethics toward this issue. But when it's sort of a granted that we do have these exemptions when when we have a standard, I do think we should apply the standard across the board. Mr. Stevens. Mr. SHARP. Jim. Vice Mayor and Member of the City Council, it really is a policy question for a policy issue for the city council. I think at this point there would be kind of a revenue offset if if if you kind of grandfather the those folks in. But it really is a policy issue will will adopt whatever the city council wants to you know, will implement whatever the city council must adopt. Okay. So that would be according to Councilmember Austin's calculation, about 3000 or so, no. How many licensed in good standing that we have? There's license in good standing. I think it is a little over 3000. Unaltered is. Little. Unaltered. So those are the only ones that would be in the spirit of assuring that this measure passes. Those would be the only ones impacted by this. Is that correct, Mr. City Attorney? That is correct. Ones who are currently licensed animals. Okay. Now I understand Councilmember Price. Thank you. I want to congratulate Vice Mayor Lowenthal and Councilwoman Mungo, because I know that they were both very involved in this and worked very hard to bring this discussion forward. And I'm opening, too. I'm open to hearing from my colleagues tonight on. Councilwoman Mungo's. I guess it's a friendly that she's proposed. I'm not sure. But I think anything we can do to offset the costs, given our financial predicament at the city right now, is something that we should consider. And so in regards to that, I would be supportive of anything we can do to offset the costs. And again, I want to congratulate both of you for working so hard on this issue. I know it's something that that you're both very passionate about. Mr. City Attorney, did you queue up again? Yes. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Just a point of clarification from the council member from the fifth District heads, I believe offered a friendly amendment. I don't know if the maker of the motion has accepted that, but I want to be clear. When we're having a council discussion where that sits on the floor, think. I'm still listening. Thank you. So it has not been accepted at this time? No. We still have council member Austin to speak. Councilmember Alston. Thank you. And I'm actually friendly to the friendly amendment, should it be accepted. And if not, I'm prepared to offer a substitute motion to incorporate the Flint friendly amendment. I think it's very important that we not we we recognize the fact that people have been following the law, the law and the policies laid down by this council in good faith for for many years. And it's it's somewhat unfair to those responsible pet owners today to change the rules on them mid-stream. Right. For those there's there are two thirds of the dogs in this city. And pet owners in this city are unfortunately, particularly those who own dogs or are not acting responsibly. And I think this policy is really meant for those people. But if. In good faith if you've been registering your dog every year. And let's just make it clear. Not everybody who who keeps their dog intact is a breeder. Right. Not every intact animal is going to to create a litter. And I'll just be personally. Right. I've owned dogs my entire life, and I've never had a litter. Um, I've never. I haven't always been neutered. My, my, my animals either. I have two animals today. I have a girl dog. I have a boy, Don. The girl dog was was a fixed three years ago. I think I'm responsible as a pet owner because I'm not having litters in my in my household. And so I think you need to look at the the how this this policy is going to impact our residents, and particularly those who are acting in good faith and who are doing what they're supposed to be doing. They are following the law. They are they're feeding their dogs good food every day. They're giving their dogs water. They're taking the dogs for a walk. They're cleaning up after their dogs. And they're not having litters. They're registering their dogs. Those people should earn our consideration tonight as well. So if I might ask a question and hopefully you'll understand the spirit of this question. What I heard from Councilmember Mongo in the presentation of the friendly amendment was more cost oriented. The concern of the loss of revenue of $187,500 and staff had presented a full cost recovery plan. Was that correct? Yes, it was. Okay. And Councilmember Mongo. So I met with Ted and I met with George. And while the prediction is that you would increase license rates for altered and unaltered and senior dogs and that potentially that that could bring in additional revenue, you also have the fear that the people who have their intact animals, again, go underground and then don't renew their licenses as a spayed or neutered animal. One of the challenges that we have in the city and in quite frankly, that I significantly helped with when I was with Animal Control, L.A. County is enforcement. Lomis did not even have an enforcement division. And so Long Beach contracted with L.A. County for us to come out and do the canvasing in compliance. And so I really feel strongly that we need to do two things. We need to maintain that revenue in the department and use it for additional compliance and additional when animal owners go underground and they don't buy their licenses . There's also fear that they don't get their animals vaccinated and other things that are even worse for the community. I see your heads nodding. You're in the community that I've spoken to before then. I haven't spoken to any of you specifically, but I appreciate that you're knowledgeable on this issue. And so I have any fear. I have fear of reducing any revenue to the department. Any revenue that does come in on top of that would be considered one time revenue, and I hope it would be used for enforcement. As I kind of mentioned to Ted in ensuring that this would bring up the status of animal services and the resources we have to ensure compliance. I talked about compliance on the last issue and I'll talk about it again. The good animal owners aren't the ones I'm worried about. It's all the others out there that we need to enforce. Okay. And I appreciate that. And I and I do think that the concern over the loss in revenue, especially if we're making up for it by increasing fees to folks that are abiding by the rules is a concern as well as just when I heard Councilmember Austin address that, it didn't sound like it was the financial concern , your primary concern as well, because I heard you relate to your animals. I think I raised the financial concern originally. If this is going to cost us about $200,000 a year in implementing this program, and if if the will of this council is to move forward to do that, we need to be looking at everything we possibly can to mitigate those type of losses, because obviously, based on our budget outlook in our in our study session last week, we don't really have a lot of room to move. Right. And and staff did present a cost recovery plan. But as Councilmember Mongo had expressed, even under that plan, there's still a strain to pet owners. And so I just I want to be sure that we acknowledge staff for not coming here with something that just costs money. They actually came here with a full cost recovery proposal as well. We can still direct it however we'd like, but I do think I don't want it to be unsaid that they just dropped a $200,000 loss on our labs. But that's definitely not what I intended. All the best cost recovery options are well appreciated and I appreciate the small increase in animal licensing that actually puts us closer to the regional average as we discussed at our meeting. And it also trickles away the revenue of the unaltered dogs over time. And so I would hope that our city manager's office, because they are stewards of the public funds and good budget managers, they would never consider the unaltered dog licenses, the variance between the unaltered and the spayed or neutered amount as ongoing revenue. Because we would know that not to be the case anymore, because those animals will either pass away or decide to get spayed or neutered. And so I hope that we can maintain that one time funding for them. Okay. Thank you. And I am open. Mr. City Attorney. I know you keep looking at me bated breath. I am open to that friendly amendment and would like to hear from. And would like to hear from members of the public on this issue if you'd like to address council on this item. We the motion as it stands is to adopt the item with the friendly amendment. Vice Mayor Members I can, if I may. After hearing the Council member Austin speak, is it the desire of the Council that this amendment will basically grandfather in the existing owners so that this is effective as of a date certain and that no other new dog owner would be allowed into the have this exemption? Is that correct? It is. October one is the date. So anyone who is registering their animal. Rights prior to October 1st of 2015 and then maintains their license current would be able to maintain that animal. So after October 1st of 2015. The deadline, that's the deadline. And so that still leaves us in the 3000 or so unaltered registered animal. So, Judy. I. Yes. Good evening, everyone. I'm Judy Crumpton. My address is on file and I reside in Long Beach. And once again, I would like to thank vice mayor and council members, Mongo and Price for bringing this forward. I do want to address a few issues and I want to say that Ted Stevens and vice mayor covered things beautifully. So I don't want to, you know, just repeat what you're doing. But real quickly, everyone who is in support, please hold up your posters to show and these are your humane advocates who work every day tirelessly for this community and to save animals lives. Also, just real quick, this is kind of a fun thing, but it kind of gives you an idea and this is what I use in humane education and 15 dogs, 45 cats. And you for every person that is born. 15 dogs and 45 cats are also born. So think about that. All the members of your house, how many are there? And we need to do something about this because a lot of this comes from irresponsible pet owners and backyard breeders. And tonight we have the opportunity to cut these numbers down. Also, I gave our packets and Mr. Austin, I was rather hoping you in particular would have read the one packet and thank you for bringing up the Santa Cruz situation. I do want to say that the American Kennel Club has been telling folks that the that the mandatory spay neuter ordinance in Santa Cruz is not working well in your packets. From Melanie Sobel, the general manager of the Santa Cruz County Animal Shelter, says quite otherwise. It's an excellent letter. It addresses all of your concerns, the licensing, the cost, all of it. It's an outstanding letter. It was emailed to you guys a few days ago and it addresses. The AKC has made numerous misrepresentations about the Santa Cruz County animal shelter. In its argument against the proposed spay neuter ordinance, the AKC states that the the shelter as euthanasia rates have been essentially flat since 95. As the attached statistics demonstrates, this is incorrect. Both our animal intake and animal euthanasia rates have steadily decreased since 94, the year our county spay neuter ordinance was enacted. And it goes on and on. And another real important part Santa Cruz County's animal intake and euthanasia rates have decreased since our mandatory spay neuter ordinance took effect in 94, even with other variables such as adding an underserved area and an oh for the economic recession starting in oh eight and general population growth, mandatory spay neuter is an invaluable tool when animals end up at the shelter and when animals are causing problems in the field, it's totally successful. So please do read this before you vote tonight. Mr. Austin Also, I've talked to other general managers of other cities that have mandatory spay neuter. They say the same thing. We have lots of organizations that are here tonight. They're going to speak for themselves. Another outstanding letter from an incredible organization, actors and others for animals in complete support of mandatory spay neuter. The support just continues and goes on and on. The only way that we are going to put a dent in pet overpopulation is through prevention. Prevention. Don't let the word mandatory shake you up so much. It's really not such a bad, tough word. It has a meaning, that's all. For heaven's sakes, get over it. We absolutely need to do this. Can we please give it a try? If it doesn't work, you won't do it. But trust me, it's going to work. Thank you so much. Thank you, Judy. Next speaker, please. Thank you, vice mayor and council members. My name is Elizabeth Orrick. I'm the national manager of Puppy Mill. Initiatives for Best Friends Animal Society. And we are in full support of a retail sales. Ordinance for Long. Beach. The fact is pet mills, particularly puppy mills, otherwise known as USDA licensed breeders, are in business to supply pet stores because responsible breeders don't sell to pet stores. And that's because they don't sell to third parties and because it's not financially viable. And this. Tenant never sell. A puppy to a pet store can be found in every reputable Breeders Code of ethics, including all of the parent breed clubs on the American Kennel Club's own website. And yet there is a humane alternative, which is for those stores to stop supporting the puppy and kitten mill industries by transitioning. To an adoption model, as thousands of pet. Stores across the country are already doing very successfully. So this ordinance would. Not. Preclude. Pet stores from staying in business. It would not impact. Responsible hobbie breeders who could continue to sell directly to the public. And of course it would not prevent anyone from adopting an animal. Shelters and rescue groups are full of purebred dogs, cats. Puppies, kittens and. Rabbits looking for homes just like that little guy we saw at the beginning of the meeting. And those are the animals that are dying in the highest numbers in our shelters simply because there aren't enough people adopting them and there isn't enough. Space to house them all. So does it really. Make sense to. Keep producing more of a product for which there's already such a surplus that we're killing thousands every. Day, 9000 a day in this country? From an economic. Standpoint, no. From a humane standpoint, absolutely not. A pet sales ordinance is a fair, effective and reasonable way to prevent an endless supply of poorly bred pets from being imported into this city so that consumers are protected and fewer animals will have to. Suffer in order to supply the retail pet trade. And to relieve. The burden on. Shelters and therefore the. Taxpayers. By getting companion animals out of those facilities and into retail settings where they have. A greater chance of being adopted by the public. That's why 75 other communities across North America have already enacted this, 16 of which are cities and counties right. Here in Southern California. So we commend the city of Long Beach for taking this important step to join them. We support you and we thank you. Thank you. Hi. My name is me up on Adana. I live and work in District two, so I'm downtown all the time. I'm here today to ask for your protection. And the way you can protect me your constituents is by passing an ordinance that mandates the span neuter of our nonexempt Long Beach Dogs. I'm not affiliated with any organizations. I just live and work here. I'm here all the time. I regularly find non speed, non neutered haggard because they've been bred too often, recently pregnant, still nursing dogs on the street. I find them so often, in fact, that I have to carry a leash and treats with me so I can help pull them out of traffic or being hit by a car or causing an accident. When I catch these dogs and reach out to no kill rescues, they are so full with other dogs that they can't help me. So at that point I have no choice but to call animal care. And when I do that, I know that it may definitely be a death sentence for that dog, especially if it's a little Chihuahua. So I'm put in the awful, painful, heartbreaking situation all the time to either take this dog in knowing that it may not come out. Or spends lots of my own money that I don't have because I make 1150 an hour trying to save that dog. So. No matter what, despite the fact that I am a law abiding citizen, that votes, that pays my taxes, that takes care of my own dog, really? Well, I lose no matter what. And I lose because uncontrolled, cruel backyard breeders in my neighborhood are hurting me. They do this all the time. When they're done with the dogs, they dump them. It's not fair. I'm sick of it. I'm exhausted by it. I'm broke because of it. I'm tired. I'm asking you, please, to do anything in your power to prevent this from happening to me. And I know I'm not the only one. I'm pretty sure every single person in this row and that row goes through the same thing all the time. So thank you so much for listening to me. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. Hello. My name is Vince Pudsey and I have made on Beach my home for almost 40 years. I am a homeowner, graduate, an alumni member of Long Beach State, and I am also a district leader for the Humane Society of the United States. I represent our Congressional Congressional District, District 47. Since I chose Long Beach to be my home, I have witnessed a number of positive changes as it is a very progressive city that I am proud of. I'm here tonight with my wife and other supporters to urge the City Council to enact the retail pet sales ordinance. I'm originally from Saint Louis, Missouri, which sadly has become known as the puppy mill state among animal welfare groups. This is an embarrassing stigma to have the puppy mill industry profits on the misery and suffering of companion animals, primarily man's best friend dogs. Some of these animals spend their entire lives in the same cage, enduring horrid conditions. I read somewhere in a survey that Long Beach was the 30th most dog friendly city in the country. And I thought to myself, Which communities are ahead of us? We have Dog Beach, Blessing of the Animals, Bulldog Beauty contests, Halloween parades, etc. as established tonight, or mayor or vice mayor and many members of the council or animal lovers. Then there is Dog's best friend, Justin Rudd. We all know and our great great bit too. We enjoy Stroll and Savers concerts in the Park, Second Street and the many events that make our city a special place to live. Dogs and the people who love them or a constant at all of these. They are a fabric of our lifestyle. Ted Stevens, our animal care director, and his staff are continuously breaking new ground, trying to improve the adoption rate and save lives while lowering the costs at our shelters. Pet stores that obtain animals from unscrupulous breeders are a detriment to our city. Besides their support of a cruel compassion as industry, they restrict the number of adoptions of healthy animals from our shelter and other local rescue organizations. Many pet stores have successfully switched from the sale of puppy mill dogs to the sale of rescue shelter animals. This process saves the city money from unwanted euthanasia and other burdens and costs to the operation of our city shelter. Virtually all breeds of animals are available from humane and legitimate rescue organizations. Many pet stores across the country have adopt this business model. People saw the actual conditions at which these breeding factories operate. This would not even be a discussion. No animal lover would condone these conditions. So I am here tonight to to ask that the ordinance be passed and that we as a city continue to not just do the right thing, but to set an example for others. And I applaud the work that's being done by Animal Care, Animal Care Services and the council. Thank you. Thank you. Hi, I'm Deborah Turner with Friends of Long Beach Animals. Here to say that, well, if there is no law, of course I'm in support of the ordinance. If there is no change, no law, then there is nothing to enforce. And hey, there's no progress in that. Right. So let's let's go ahead and give this a shot. Let's go all the way with it. Let's progress to a kinder, more civilized way of treating our pet overpopulation problem instead of eliminating our wretched refuse of all of the animals that are that are extra and that are at this point, throwaway items. Certainly we can find a more civilized way than what we're doing now. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening, Vice Mayor and Honorable City Council members. My name is Bruce Wieland and I'm here on behalf of Peter's. More than 3 million members and supporters, over 30,000 of whom live in the Long Beach area. Thank you for considering vital amendments to Title six of the Long Beach Municipal Code. For the sake of all the homeless animals in Long Beach, I urge you to vote in favor of these proposals. Every day is a matter of life and death for homeless animals. Each and every dog and cat bred and born, whether it's on purpose or by accident. And every animal bought from a pet store or breeder often means that an animal who's already waiting for a home in an animal shelter will lose their opportunity at finding one. At PETA, we hear from people in communities all across the country where similar requirements have been passed. And we are repeatedly being told that these ordinances are providing the essential tools that allow animal control and shelter workers to better address animal abandonment, abuse and neglect in their communities. The only way to end animal overpopulation is to bring the birthrate down, and mandatory spay neuter ordinances, coupled with the availability of low cost sterilization, does exactly that. And fortunately, here in Long Beach, you already have in place these resources for lower and fixed income residents. The euthanasia of thousands of animals at the city's shelters each year, and the suffering of countless other animals who never even make it to a shelter but instead die badly on the streets are all 100% preventable. Please vote in favor of these lifesaving measures. Thank you so much. Thank you. Good evening, council members. My name is Wendy Aragon, and I'm president of Pet Assistance Foundation. We've been active in this community for since 1955, helping people spay and neuter their pets through education. Low cost referral to veterinary clinics. And subsidy for those who could not afford to alter their pets. We feel sometimes like we're just we've thrown money at the problem, but we don't get anywhere. We're bailing the ocean out with a thimble. I have turned in a statement from our organization to each of the council members, and we applaud you for bringing this critical issue up for public discussion and hope that you vote. And a unanimous yes on this or on these two ordinances. I don't want to be preaching to the choir tonight, but anyone involved in animal welfare knows the suffering that pet overpopulation causes. It's already been talked about here tonight. I do want to bring up the point, however, that we feel based on the experience on our hotline and volunteers in the field, that abandonment is on the rise for two reasons. Owner turn in fees that animal control requires people dump them rather than pay the 60, 70, $80, whatever it is. And who do they come to? The rescue people. And the rescue people most often are full. Secondly, the public doesn't want to deal with euthanasia. Unfortunately. The No kill movement, though it's a wonderful concept. Utopia in many respects has to some extent miseducated the public. The point is, there are not enough quality homes for all these animals. We truly believe the number of discarded animals is much higher than has reported because who's out there in the streets, in the barrios, God knows , wherever. This morning at 630, I was out near the riverbed on the border of Long Beach and Paramount, picking up a dog that someone had dumped that was dying of distemper. In the words of Dan Knapp, the late former director of Los Angeles Department of Animal Services, breeding animals is a privilege, not a right, because it creates dependent creatures for whom someone must ultimately be responsible. With an ordinance as carefully written as yours. There should be no room for a responsible breeder to object. Or a responsible dog club for that matter, or cat fancy or whomever. Pet overpopulation is a social problem that requires three different approaches. Education. Legislation with enforcement. And. What's the third thing, dimwit? And low cost sterilization. Oh, my God. I ought to know that since I've been in this since 1969. We must not forget that laws in themselves have tremendous educational value in a democracy. They let the community know that the body politic has acted with public input to address a community problem. We are totally in agreement with the pet store ordinance and that's already been addressed here tonight very eloquently. We urge you to vote to pass these two ordinances and put Long Beach intact and forgive the pun there and put Long Beach on the map as a beacon of light in a sensible and humane approach to solving a tragic and longstanding social problem in our community. Thank you. Good evening, Madam Vice Mayor. Members of the Council. My name is Connie Koehler. I am a member of a team of local dog owners who are very experienced, long time owners and exhibitors who have addressed some of you directly and certainly have met with all of your staffs for all district offices since the beginning of January. I am here to oppose the amendment on the basis of being bad public policy for the community and based on the extensive research that our team has done. We will get into the devilish details that Councilman Austin referred to earlier. And let me start with refuting Judy Crompton statement that the AKC stated that the Santa Cruz County statistics on euthanasia were essentially flat. Those statistics did not come from Santa Cruz County. They came from the California State Department of Public Health, the Veterinary Public Health Section, the California Local Rabies Control Activities Annual Report dated 2013. I euthanized animals in Santa Cruz County in 2006 were 626. In 2013, when this report came out, they were 629. I am a trained economist. That is flat curve. MSN as far as as posing unacceptable cost to municipalities as far as licensing revenue from loss compliance, the average license compliance rates in California jurisdictions without mandatory spay neuter are average about 33%. But the average license compliance rates in California jurisdictions with mandatory spay neuter average around 14%. In in L.A. City. In L.A. County. In Sacramento County. Those are all roughly the case. Increased intake and euthanasia rates have led to increased shelter and implementation costs as a result. In Lee County, Florida, which is around the city of Fort Myers, Amazon was adopted in February of 2014. The shelter costs rose almost $750,000 in six months. As a result, the ordinance was repealed in November of 2014. In Dallas, Amazon was implemented in 2008. Animal control cost increased 22% from that time to 2010, and there was an overall decrease in licensing that reduced revenue by $400,000. In L.A. City, euthanasia rate rates rose from 7000 in 2008 to 9000 in 2011, or 29%. So these are not acceptable costs for the city. They are certainly not acceptable costs for citizens. And we urge you to vote now. Thank you. Good evening. My name is Scott Peterson. I'm a resident of Huntington Beach, but I come to Long Beach almost every week, either on business or for pleasure. I've been reading over this ordinance, and it scares the hell out of me. Oh, very first line unaltered. Dogs and cats prohibited, period. No exception for visitors. No exception. If I drive my car through Long Beach, I'm subject that ordinance. Maybe now you'll give me a warning. In two years, when you do something, don't laugh. That's it. Read the darn thing. There's no exemption for events. If you want to hold a dog show or a cat show or some type of trial here. You're putting your animal in danger by bringing it here because you would make it subject to mandatory spay neuter law in the city. In several places. It refers to a recognized agency without ever defining what the recognized agency is or stating how you become part of it or where it is even found. I looked at the service animal section of this and it's absolute rubbish. It violates both California's Civil Code 54, 55 and the ADA type two and three. You can't make your own definitions for these. What you can do is extend it with. Many people have to include service dogs and training psychiatric support dogs, emotional support dogs and other dogs that assist people. There is no provision in here for that. Yeah. Those are the main things that I have on on that particular thing. As a previous lady said, speed. Mandatory spay neuter does not really have a good track record when you start looking at the real numbers. There's a lot of numbers floating around. But if you talk to people like the AKC or if you talk to some of the other groups, it can actually tell you where the numbers came from. You might be quite shocked at the lack of success. Almost entirely. The result is that the costs of enforcement go up and compliance goes down. It's just sad. And I and I want to say in finishing that, I'm in favor of spay neuter. I'm not in favor of mandatory spay neuter. I own a large breed. Even going up to a year would be detrimental to me because I own bull mastiffs and they generally mature between two and three years. So what do I do then? Go back and go back and go back and say, oh, yeah, well, it doesn't work. It doesn't happen. Anyway, thank you very much for your time. Thank you. And before I take the next speaker, I was going to ask Mr. Stevens to. Highlight the part about the exemption for the show dogs and the fact that we have shows in town as well as the exemption for service animals and. The others in that category. Yeah. So I guess I can take these service animals. I mean, our bureau currently already processes licenses and permits for service animals. And so any of those animals that would come to us for that could get that exemption. Just this past weekend, I learned that actually most service animals are spayed or neutered anyway, but that exemption would still be there for the service animals. And and so we would follow the federal guidelines for ADA when we issue those permits anyway. So that would just tie in with that. I don't see an issue there. As far as the show dogs, again, we offer that exemption for show dogs and ours is actually more lenient than most of the other cities. Thank you for that clarification. Next speaker, please. Hello. My name is Kimberly Buchanan, and I urge you to vote no on this ordinance. I've lived in Long Beach since 1988, first in District three and now in District five. I'm a small business owner, homeowner. I've spent many hours volunteering at Animal Control when it was over on Spring Street. I teach now at the SPCA, at the Pitchford facility, and I've worked in assisted with multiple regional and national rescue organizations. I'm also a part of the group of concerned dog owners who visited with each of your district office staff, either yourself or your staff. We presented this document. Hopefully you all have read this document and we outlined very clear revisions or very clear reasons why mandating spay and neuter is not good public policy. We also provided several alternatives that would bring the community, city and animal control together rather than creating a divisive and adversarial relationship. The purpose of an animal control facility is to protect its citizens, return lost pets to their homes, shelter those who have no homes, and to prevent animal cruelty. Even with the transfer, as we know of most adoptable animals to the SPCA, L.A. side, according to Director Ted Stevens, in 2013, the city experienced the lowest impound and euthanasia rates, as well as the highest adoption rates in 25 years. According to the city's statistics that we were received, 2014 proved to be even better. So good job. My concern, though, other than the issues that we bring up in this document, is the health and safety portion of the animal control purpose. We've seen rabies in skunks, distemper in many raccoons. And now typhus is showing up in Southern California. Possum. I've experienced the raccoon issue personally. Shortly after arriving home one evening from being away for the weekend, a sick raccoon showed up at my doorstep. I didn't know if it had rabies or distemper. I called for emergency services. The fire department answered, not animal control. There were no animal control officers to come and remove the animal. So I had this animal outside of my door and it wasn't until the next morning and many of my neighbors called Animal Control that they removed it. So that is a personal health hazard and a danger to me and my dogs. With only a 30% license compliance of dogs in the city of Long Beach and difficulty enforcing the existing laws, please don't pile more onto the role of our animal control department. Instead, focus on incentives for licensing, pets, support and enforce and reinforce the community volunteer spay neuter programs that are working. Good job. And whether it's lack of housing, health, behavior or other costs, find out why people are actually relinquishing their dogs or not reclaiming them. There's reasons there addressed those problems. So in closing, by keeping those dogs out of the shelter would open space and save precious resources and save more animals. So in closing, I would ask you, please vote no. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Next speaker, please. My name is Judith McMann. I am a lifelong resident of Long Beach, having gone to school here and college here. I own a business in Long Beach and live in the fifth District on my home there for the last 40 plus years. And I do have one of the 3000 intact licensed dogs in the city of Long Beach. I also have two spayed dogs, both of whom are licensed. I'm part of the group that present to your staff and or you the packet that you have in front of your head, in front of you. We are very concerned about this issue. We all believe in voluntary spay and neuter, and we think that that's something you all should work to support and improve, and we're willing to help you do that. Mandatory spay and neuter does not work. As you heard, I agree with my colleagues. We presented it in our packet a number of ways to assist and improve your voluntary spay neuter program, which is working. And I will tell you that the dog community stands behind you and will help increase that. We're already looking into grants to assist in raising money to improve that program. So let us work with you. One of the gentlemen earlier said something about a seat at the table. Give us a seat at the table. I strongly urge you to vote down this this proposal. However, if you're reluctant to do that. I suggest that you create a group to study this issue in full, considering all the ramifications and and let the stakeholders be involved, including the the people who work to rehome animals, including the people who show dogs, including veterinarians. The people who know animals. Let. Let us come to the table. We deserve a seat at the table, too. Thank you. Hi. Good evening. My name is Kari, two young, and I'm the director of agility for the American Kennel Club. Our government relations department has sent each of you an official letter. But I wanted to come personally and further explain the opposition of the dog enthusiasts. Before I start that, though, I want to note that a second letter was sent to everyone today, March 10th. It was after we received a copy of the letter that Ms.. Melanie Sobel, the director of Santa Cruz County Animal Shelter, sent to each of you. We found that it contained a number of false, misleading statements regarding the EC's mission position and statements on canine policy. Ms.. Robles letter claims that the AKC has erroneously reported Santa Cruz shelter statistics in reference to Long Beach. In fact, the EC's only communication with the Long Beach City Council were the original letters which we sent, neither of which referenced Santa Cruz. We've not made any statements concerning Santa Cruz, animal shelter, their use, euthanasia or their licensing rates. But let me tell you a little bit about myself, which will give you an idea of a lot of people in our dog community. They've been a major part of my life, our dogs, since I started with mixed breed poodle. At 12 years old, I've owned and shown also many purebred dogs. Currently at home, we have two rescue dogs, both of whom are spayed. One is a poodle mix, who is an owner turn in due to aggression. The other one is a dachshund mix who was found running on the streets. I personally spayed her and then placed her in a home. Unfortunately, that home didn't work out for her. So like a responsible breeder, I said I will take her back, as anyone should do at this point. I am also considered a breeder because in my 40 years of owning purebred dogs, I have bred six puppies. Those of us who devote our time, energy and support to the sport of dogs do it for one reason. We love our dogs. If we believe that mandatory spay neuter policies would improve the lives of dogs and their owners, we would not be here objecting today. However, the fact is that these laws decrease the opportunity for pet owners to find a healthy, well, well bred pet in their community. And they hurt responsible breeders who are doing things the right way in the agility world. Many people choose to not spay and neuter their dogs until they're between 18 months, two years, maybe even older, because we want to make sure the growth plates have closed. It's not just the large dogs, and believe me, it is longer than one year. The only way you know is to do an x ray to make sure the growth plates have closed. And it is certainly later. As you know, the AKC held our EUKANUBA championship here for quite a few years. We brought in about $21 million to the city of Long Beach. We'd like to consider coming back to Long Beach, but we can't do that with this type of restriction. The AKC and our member clubs in Long Beach area can help improve animal control by providing education and guidance to pet owners. Engagement, inclusion and a sense of ownership always gets better results than punitive measures. And I believe that the Department of Animal Care has done a very good job moving in that direction, and so does the AKC, and we'd like to commend them. So again, let us be a partner, not an adversary. But we do recommend that you vote no on this. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good evening, Vice Mayor and city council members. My name is Susan Murphy and I am also a member of the Concerned Dog Owners who have visited each of your offices. I'm president of the Orange Coast Bull Terrier Club Secretary and chairman and Health Committee Chair of the Bull Terrier Club of America. I'm the liaison to the AKC Canine Health Foundation, as well as trustee, secretary and trustee of the Bull Terrier, Rescue and Welfare Trust. And I'm proud to say that we started that. I was possibly starting I started this group over 15 years ago, and we rescue dogs nationally. We are huge group. I've spent 40 years involved in rescue, animal health and welfare, public education, and just enjoying my dogs. When we visited your office speaking to you or your chiefs of staff in order to address. The city's voluntary. Spay neuter program, which is one of the most successful voluntary programs in California, versus the proposed ordinance, which advocates a mandatory program. When we met, we reiterated the the reported statistics of Long Beach already successful program, as well as documented evidence of many cities that have put a mandatory law into place with terrible results, all of whom showed an increase in pounds, an increase in euthanasia, a decrease in adoptions, and finally, a substantial decrease in overall compliance. This decrease in licensing becomes a problem when animal owners to choose to avoid seeing their veterinarians for rabies vaccines in order to remain invisible to animal control for licensing as well as spaying and neutering of their dogs and cats. This, on its own could prove to be a huge public health issue for Long Beach and surrounding areas, since there have been a rise in the reported report of rabid raccoons as well as distemper with skunks in the area. During our meetings, we also presented several solutions and suggestions for alternatives to enhance the city's already. Successful voluntary. Programs, such as increasing the voucher program, opening up the shelter hours to include some evening hours, and exploring possible grants that would be available to aid the city in making their program much more available to all in the low income and senior residents who may have difficulties due to financial and transportation issues. We noted in a memorandum from the Director of Parks and Recreation, Recreation and Marine dated February 5th, 2014, to the City Manager, Mr. West, where Mr. Champion congratulates the city on their animal care service accomplishment, stating that the city reported the lowest number of animals impounded in 20 or 25 years. The lowest number of animals euthanized in 25 years with euthanasia is 11% lower than 2012. Over 1900 pets were spayed or neutered. Dog and cat adoptions. Had increased over 33%, and dog and cat transfers and rescues increased by 27%. In this glowing report of long beaches achievements concerning our animals. Never was there any recommendation for an ordinance that even suggested the need for a mandatory program. We congratulate Long Beach on its obviously successful voluntary program that is already in place. Therefore, we asked the city council members to vote no on their proposed ordinance and thereby become a leader in California with a documented, voluntary program that has shown continued progress and one that could be a model for all cities in California. Excuse me, California. And if I could ask everyone who intends to speak to show their hands or queue up, I know it's difficult to stand. Okay. Thank you. Just so we have an idea. Yes, of course. Come on, forward. Okay. So we have about two or three more speakers. Okay. Good evening, everyone. I'm. My name is Luis de Waal, and I've been an animal control professional since 1980. I began my career in the city of Long Beach, and I'm proud to still be here. I would like to address the audience tonight that I the last time I spoke when we were discussing this prior, I explained what a valuable tool it is for our department to have this law on the books. I want to talk about our shelter and how proud we are, as Ted Stevens said about our youth and euthanasia rate decreasing our in pounds going down. But it is still a tool our officers need and they need it badly. Take a walk through our kennels. And see the Chihuahuas and see the pit. Bulls. The majority of them come in intact and not altered. And if. We if you say. The citizens want to be invisible to animal control because they fear mandatory spay and neuter or mandatory vaccinations, we don't want to be invisible. We want to be in the community helping them with low cost options for Spain and neutering free Spain. Neutering, which friends have Long Beach animals, has been offering, letting our officers offer to citizens through coupons to their organization. It's imperative that we get this ordinance out there. Of course, there's people that want to comply with getting their animals spayed or neutered, but they can't afford it. We can address that. But there are the people that do not want to spay and neuter their pets because they feel it is their right to have an unaltered animal. But just as. An example, I was out on a call where a man was so proud because his female pit bull had just had 15 puppies. She had he had intentionally bred her with a neighbor's dog. And he had T-shirts. Made of the stud dogs. Picture on it for all his children to wear. Education, definitely. I tried to help him with education with what what he had done, but unfortunately, he needed enforcement. And the enforcement tool we need is mandatory spay neuter in our city. Thank you. Thank you. Vice Mayor Lowenthal, members of the City Council. My name is John Zapp, and I'm a 30 year resident of Long Beach and a homeowner in the fifth District and Councilwoman Mango's neighbor. I'm here today to voice my opposition to the mandatory spay neuter ordinance. I urge you to vote it down. Vice Mayor, you began the meeting by thanking the groups here for participating with you in coming up with this ordinance. But I was not included. I am a stakeholder in this ordinance, a very critical stakeholder in this ordinance. None of the intact dog owners in this city that are members of any club I'm a member of the AKC of any other organization were extended the courtesy to participate in providing you input into this ordinance. The meetings that many of you attended back in October were a complete mystery to us. It's entirely possible that had we been there, we would have been able to discuss with you the fact that we believe in spay and neutering our animals. We believe in that. But we also know that it is unhealthy for some animals. Contrary to the common belief that there are no consequences. There are consequences. There are long term health consequences to that. We believe also that the spay and neuter mandatory ordinance falls more severely on those individuals who can least afford to to comply. We believe that it imposes the city's judgment on what should be a decision between a dog owner and their veterinarian. The the individuals who right now have intact and unlicensed dogs, you call them irresponsible people and some of them undoubtedly are, but not all of them. Many of them are culturally or language, have language barriers, have economic barriers, and are unable to to to spay and neuter their dogs for any number of additional reasons. The data that we presented to you and your staff over the last few months shows that mandatory spay neuter ordinances have not been effective, that the primary reason people do not spay and neuter their dogs is their inability to afford it, as well as their inability to know about the requirements for that. That comes not from the American Kennel Club or Breeders that comes from the downtown Dog Rescue Group in Los Angeles, which conducted a pilot program on intake assessments at one of the major shelters in the city. That's what they found. We also know that although the American Veterinary Medical Association may believe that spay and neuter ring is beneficial to the animal, their official policy is to oppose mandatory spay neuter ordinance. The Humane Society of the United States came here and spoke on behalf of the the ordinance barring pet sales in stores. The U.S. has a policy opposing mandatory spay neuter. Best friends was here. They have expressed opposition to mandatory spay neuter. PETA is the only organization that came here and said we're in favor of it. PETA, in case you wonder, has been classified by the FBI as a terrorist organization. And in addition, the state of Virginia. Let's respect our speakers time, please. I will. You are out of time, sir. You're out of time. Thank you. On that note. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hello. My name's Robin Hicks and I'm in the fourth district. I'm a schoolteacher. I'm a lifetime Long Beach resident. I'm wondering if Mr. Stevens could repeat the number of animals that were killed in 2014. 4000 4054 total. 4054 dead animals 4054 dead animals. If we like dogs, if you care about dogs, you care about all dogs. And these dogs that are running loose on the street that are mixed breed dogs. If you care about dogs, no dogs should be having babies. I'm driving to work. There's dogs on the left. There's dogs on the right, just like this young woman had mentioned. It's exhausting. It's exhausting because when you drive by and you see these innocent little animals that need your help, you take a detour. No matter what you're doing, you're chasing them. They're about to cause accidents. You don't know what to do with them. You have to sometimes take them to the shelter, which puts such an emotional burden on you. I've rescued about 100 animals in the last four years myself. If you love dogs, you love all dogs. I keep hearing people talk about the health of dogs. What about the health of the dogs on the street? They seem to be talking about the health of dogs that people want. We're talking about the unwanted dogs, those 4000 animals that are getting killed at the pound. If you love them, we need if you love all dogs, we need mandatory spay neuter. The voluntary spay neuter is working to a point, but it's not going to get us all the way there. We need mandatory spay neuter. I'm a schoolteacher. I'm all about education. But there's a certain point at which you have to say, this is the way it has to be. We have to try this. We have to have spay neuter. It's important. We owe it to those 4000 animals that every single year are being killed. Even if the number is decreasing slightly, the mandatory spay neuter will get us there quicker. It's wrong that these people are standing up for spay neuter. Voluntary spay neuter. When the voluntary spay neuter is still resulting in 4000 dead animals, 4000 animals that are getting illegally injected, put in a trash can or whatever's done with them and cremated. It's not right. Long Beach needs to be a compassionate city. I'm tired like this woman is tired of rescuing animals and taking care of other people's lack of responsibility, which is everywhere. Thank you. Please vote yes. Thank you. Hello. My name is Kelly King. Thank you for your time. I won't take very much of it. I think the thing that hits me here tonight is that everyone, no matter what side, really loves dogs. And I commend everyone for that. It's nice to hear the polite arguments because it makes me think differently. The word that made me think the most tonight is when I heard someone refer to dogs as sport. And my wife and I have two dogs that we've rescued and we think of them as the vice mayor said, as children. So I think how you vote tonight will decide how people think that Long Beach views their dogs as sport or as children. Thank you. Thank you. Hi. My name is Jennifer Johnson, and I come to you tonight as one of your low income constituents, those that you're worried about that can't find or afford the services. They're out there. There's free services, there's low cost services. And I live every day around people who refuse to spay and neuter because they can make a quick buck on a litter of puppies. Okay. Now, first of all, let me preface this by saying I used to be against this. I used to agree with those who said it's my dog, it's my choice whether I breed this dog or not. But the honor system is not working when I live every single day. I run across 1 to 3 animals, just dogs and many more cats that just have no home because there are not enough. The myth that there is a home for every animal is a myth. First of all, it's a myth to begin with. And then when you factor in a good home into that equation, that cuts it down even lower. There are too many there are too many backyard breeders that are ruining our breeds, the beloved breeds that we love. There's people out there every day breeding these animals, knowing nothing about what they're doing genetically. Oh, I bought this puppy for $800. Let me go back and get a brother or a sister so I can make my money back. Yes, I hear that almost daily. They don't know what they're doing. They're ruining the breeds. They're creating monsters that people want to abolish. I'm not for real. For getting rid of all dogs. No. Responsible breeding. Yes. That's great. Love your breed and breed responsibly. And rescue those that need to be rescued. But those of us that are boots on the ground every single day out there in my neighborhood, our low income neighborhoods in Long Beach, we are out there educating folks almost on a daily basis how to take what's proper pet care. Some of these people have no clue. And the ones that do, we applaud them and we celebrate them. But we are out there every day seeing the results of ridiculous, careless, money grubbing individuals who have no business owning a pet, let alone procreating something for you like its color. It's ridiculous. And we're tired of it. We're tired of cleaning up other people's messes on a daily basis. The founder of my group that I volunteer with, Fix Long Beach, has spent thousands and thousands of dollars on her of her own money on a daily basis, rescuing and cleaning up other people. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you so much. Next speaker, please. Good evening, counsel. My name is John Gonzalez. I retired from the city of Mission Viejo after working here in the city of Long Beach for 22 years. I started my animal control career back in 1974. I'm kind of here tonight as a very concerned person and an animal lover. I'm very frustrated that this has been going on and on and on over every single year. Some of the people here tonight are saying that spay neuter doesn't work. I've listened to every other option over my career, 32 years in animal services, ten years I've been serving as the president of the Los Angeles County Animal Care Foundation . I also work at the Aquarium of the Pacific. I have a passion for animals. The thing that really frustrates us in this field is that every year we hear the same thing. We've got to do something. We've got to do something. For a while there, they they when I first got into the industry or in the business, they came up with reduced fees for their licenses, thinking that that was going to make a difference. It didn't really make much of a difference. If an animal was impounded, if it wasn't altered, it would have to be altered before it could be adopted again to someone else. Those things started making a difference. The only thing that's really going to make a difference, the only way you can bring down the unnecessary euthanasia of so many animals throughout these shelters is to have mandatory spay neuter. Please, I plead you. I beg you to please pass this ordinance for our future animals, for our children, so that they don't have to go through a world where we're euthanizing animals because they're unwanted. They. You. Good evening, Counsel and Vice Mayor Lowenthal. My name is Kate Karp, and my address is on record. I definitely support this ordinance. I wasn't when I was a kid. Our family cat was had been spayed and I always wanted kittens. So about 45 years ago when I was out on my own, I adopted. I got a cat. Cat had kittens with my intact tom fine, giving them away the first time. The second time a light went on. And I'm so glad it did. I had her fixed the next day and I haven't stopped since. When I moved to Long Beach about 25 years ago, I got involved with friends of Long Beach Animals. I learned about the shelter. I learned about the shelter animals and how necessary spaying and neutering is. But until I got out on the streets with fixed Long Beach, I got the same idea that this young lady got that Louise to wash said about the, you know, dogs getting hit by cars, cats running around in the streets, people, puppies running into traffic from the riverbed and people just refusing to fix their pets because they wanted to sell the litters, as my colleague said. There was one guy we went to. We went to do a house to house a house. We went to deliver information, house to house. And there was one guy that had two dogs. Once he told me that he was going to have puppies and he was going to take the mother dog to the shelter because he wanted a puppy. Yes, he did. This is what and this is tenfold. This is what we're faced with. Most of the people that come to fix Long Beach and yes, there is affordable spay neuter here. There is no cost spay neuter for the people that you say, we can't get it. We will give it to them. They're wonderfully appreciative. They they donate things. They won made us cookies once. But the number that won't let me tell you these are the people that, you know, as Judy said, the puppies and kittens, her puppies and kittens. And they're puppies. And kittens are puppies and kittens and. Council member Austen. Yes. That's the 3000 that we worry about, the 3000 intact dogs. And those are the only the ones that we know about. There are so many more that we don't. I can't say that this ordinance is going to be a magic pill or that we're going to get 100% compliance. But I'd really like to find out, especially since one of the statements is that it discriminates against people who can't afford the procedures. We've got fix Long Beach. There's going to be a spay neuter clinic on the shelter grounds. It's going to be low cost. No argument on the pet check on the pet store section. I'm just I'm really sorry. I wanted to stick to this, but so many things have come out, have come up. What I do really want to say is that I think it's absolutely unconscionable that the AKC would practically blackmail us and say, they're not coming. Thank you. Thank you. Sorry. Thank you. Vice Mayor Lowenthal. Thank you, members. My name is Sally Frankel. I have been a member I have been a citizen of Long Beach for 67 years. I have raised my children here. My children actually have stayed with the Lowenthal. They have gone to school with the lawn dolls, with John. I'm here to ask you to please do not vote for this. Please reconsider it and rewrite it. Think it out a little bit longer. I am a responsible pet owner. I play sports with my pets. My pets are my children. Just ask my daughter, she says. I love the dogs more than I do her. I have also licensed my animals my entire life. That my adult life. One of them was intact and one of them is intact and one of them was not the sport that we play. My female is the highest tidal dog in the world. The male who is intact is number 17. I do like the idea that you come up with some kind of alternative to help the responsible owners maintain the health of their dogs. Early spay and neuter is not healthy for a dog. I spend a lot of time researching breeds. I have rare breed dogs. Sometimes it takes two years to be able to get a rare breed dog. The reason I seek out the rare breed is because of health issues. I lost my one dog this summer and I have been trying to replace her with another family member. I have been interviewed and had to provide references. The scrutiny that I'm going through to get a well bred rare breed dog is almost superior to what it is to adopt a child. Because of this ordinance, I was told that I would not be able to get the dog that I have been waiting for because of the mandatory spayed neutering of an early age. Scott Peterson mentioned that the 12 year extension or 12 months extension is not long enough for large read dogs. It isn't for lunch for small bridge dogs as well. Growth plates do not come in, do not fully grow. And if you are playing a sport with your dog or running your dog, even if you go to a dog park with your dog, the growth plates are very important. And if you spayed or neutered your dog too early, you have lifelong health problems. Why should I spend the time and the money to get a rare breed dog so I will have a healthy dog? If I am forced to expand noon, neuter them earlier than they should be, which gives me lifelong problems. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good evening. Hi. Vice Mayor and City Council. Roberto in Washington. Lena maternity leave. I'm sure you're going to get this information. I do have a question to Mr. Stevens. You seem to have some pretty good facts. And out of the 4054. Dogs that were euthanized. How many were due to bites by history? Temperament. Old age. Critical illness or severe injury. If staff's not prepared to answer them today are you. Need to address the chair. Yeah. And so we're we don't take questions from the podium to staff, if you like. He pointed out some numbers. Sure. And I was hoping that he would have that record with him. Mr. Stevens. Is that something you have with you? We didn't ask for it. So I do have my kennel statistics report from last year. So. Okay. Would you like to go ahead and finish your remark? We're not doing question and answer. I'm not. I'm not in support of this mandatory ordinance. I've been in Long Beach, as you know, a good number of years. I know your family. I know a lot of the council members here. So you know my history and you know. That I look at facts and I respect facts, not emotions. And I just ask you to. Look at the facts and make your decision according. Thank you. Thank you. I will go ahead and close the public comment section and call on Councilmember Mongo. I hope that we can call for the question after this. I just want to say that I appreciate the dialog between everyone here today. I hope that those who came here in support of spay and neuter recognize that mandatory spay and neuter will be phased in with what sits on the floor today. And for those of you who brought up points such as Connie and John in the such that the friendly amendment meets the needs of those requests and questions. Additionally, while we appreciate everyone coming here tonight and spending their time, we we most of I most appreciate those of you who contacted my office in advance so we can have a dialog. Because one of the challenges you have with coming to the podium and speaking for 3 minutes is we don't have the opportunity to go get the research and return. I do want to point out a couple of things. Those who addressed our office in advance about the concerns related to not having the AKC show in Long Beach. We've alleviated that concern. We've talked with National. All of that is fine. And the Convention and Visitors Bureau has made sure that we are not going to be excluded from that. With this ordinance. Additionally information related to. Just appreciating that you're an engaged and responsible community. And we hope that you can understand that this is a process. And we appreciate each and every one of you for coming here, and especially to those of you who listened to the questions and comments made by council members and then worked into what you're saying to us about those kinds of items. Because while coming here and speaking on a script is important and valuable, answering our questions and commenting on the things that we're discussing and understanding and through this discovery process is is really poignant. And it shows what an educated constituency group you are. So thank you. With that, I hope my colleagues will vote yes. Councilmember Austin. Thank you and thank you for everybody for coming out and sharing your point of view on this very difficult issue. I wanted to address to one of the speakers earlier who mentioned that the term mandatory shouldn't be considered a scary word. And it's not. When the word is actually neutered or the term is neutered. And the policy is not enforceable. And that is where my major heartburn has been with this this policy, not the aim, not the the intent, not the the long term vision to reduce overpopulation of animals, to spay and neuter. I support that. I don't support. Policies that are unenforceable. And I have some real concerns with the enforcement here. Somebody mentioned this is a step forward progress and it can be viewed that way. But I think what we're trying to do here tonight and I do applaud my colleagues for for their work on this this issue. They're trying to we're trying to do something that's that's that's responsible. And that word has been used over and over this evening. Responsibility in a responsible policy, a responsible animal care services. What would make such services more accessible to the rest of the city as it stands right now? The majority of our city don't really have great access to where our our animal care care services is located. I think that impacts our ability to register and have higher registration rates. I think that that that impacts our ability to as a city to to really curb some of the problems that we have with the the euthanasia rate, as well as registration rate. And. And such a I don't think the current location is conducive to two working families participating and being responsible like we want them to be. I take, for example, the councilmember addresses residents council member Gonzalez's residence council. Were you wrong as residents? My residents, council member Richardson's residents. They all have to drive a considerable amount of way. This this place is located actually on the border of Orange County. Right. And so there's a considerable there's a lot to consider here in moving forward. And when I when I when I raised the fact that it would cause an undue burden on on working families, low income families, disadvantaged families. It does. And I think we need to be realistic about that. Somebody mentioned that an honor system is not working. You're right. It's not working. It's not working to where it should be working. But there's nothing to, because currently two thirds of the dogs in our city are not registered. The honor system is not working. So why do we think that a mandatory spay neuter policy will work any differently? And I haven't heard anything to make me believe that people are going to be more compliant with that than they are with our existing policies in Los. So with that, I'm going to I'm going to vote and I'm going to hold my my nose in doing so, because it's not going to be an easy vote one way or another. I do appreciate the friendly amendment that was brought forward because I think it's fair. But I think this this policy is is flawed. I think it's a fallacy to believe that mandatory spay neutering is going to all of a sudden change the way people in Long Beach deal with their pets. We have we have an issue with about 60,000 pet owners or 60,000 pets out there that aren't registered today. To me, we should be robust and working very hard to deal with that number as opposed to mandating a spay neuter and neutering policy. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Austin. And I'd like to thank everyone that came to speak on this item, as well as staff and their diligence over the last several years to work on this. There are no further requests to speak, and I want to thank you. Are you excited? Mr. Richardson? We are. Thank you. Members, cast your vote. Okay. Councilman Alston. She carries it in. So since that was the first item, we took off the regular agenda, we have the entire agenda to go through. So if you are interested in staying for the rest of the council agenda, I welcome you to do so. If not, we will conduct the rest of our business. Thank you. Thanks for coming here. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for coming down. All right, Madam Clerk, where are we on the agenda? Regular agenda item number seven. Is.

Recommendation to direct City Manager, Long Beach Health and Human Services Department and Long Beach Police Department to report on the current state of homelessness in the City of Long Beach and report back to the City Council at a future meeting. The report should include: • Any updates on the current number of individuals facing homelessness. • Information regarding requests from the Long Beach Health and Human Services Department for additional grant funding from Los Angeles County. • Information regarding all grants received in FY 15-16 for homeless services. • Total number of funds allocated by the City for mental health services and programs. • Total number of funds allocated by the City for substance abuse prevention services and programs. • Current status on homeless individuals with substance abuse issues. • Resources provided by the City for homeless children and families.

LongBeachCC_05242016_16-0474

Let's go back to our homeless items, which we thought we were going to be earlier. I apologize. So let's start. There's two of them. The first one, I believe, is item number 14. Is that right? Yes. Okay. Item 14. And then we'll take 24, which is related to that. Madam Clerk. Item 14 is communication from Councilwoman Gonzalez, Vice Mayor Lowenthal and Councilman Austin. Recommendation to direct the City Manager Language Health and Human Services Department and the Long Beach Police Department to report on the current state of homelessness in the city of Long Beach. I'm going to turn this now over to Vice Mayor Lowenthal or I'm sorry, is it Councilwoman Gonzales, actually? Thank you. So I brought for this item, as I know many people have been inquiring as to the current state of homelessness as our city is changing. There are a lot of different elements and moving parts. I know many individuals come to council each week to ask questions, and I know our health department, along with many of our community partners, are doing quite a bit in this realm to tackle the issue of homelessness and to offer more resources and to acquire grant funding and to also provide education and statistics. I can tell you firsthand that we've had about seven community watch meetings in the First District alone, and each meeting was attended by our police department, but as well as our health department, who really educated our downtown communities or West Side communities and central Long Beach communities about their work every single day in what we're doing to outreach to these populations, which I think is so very important. So this agenda item was just an informational to receive a report back related to different components that we've been hearing, not just from First District residents, but citywide. It touches on mental health services and the funds allocated substance abuse prevention services. As I think, you know, we're doing a lot of work, but I think there's certainly more we can we can do. I know we're very limited in funding, but I think in speaking with both Susan and Kelly, I know that there's a lot of work that they're doing. And in addition, homeless children and families. I did notice in a 24 report that there was a line item for families. And I notice in the reports now that I don't see that. So I wanted to actually ask about that. And in addition to the grant funding, what we're doing is specific to receiving funds from the county, which I know we've received recently, last year and so forth. And so I'll turn it over to you and the Health Department, to each of you, if there's anything you wanted to add. Now, I know we're asking for this report to come back later, but if there's any just preliminary updates you'd like to add. And then also my question related to the families section. Vice Mayor Lowenthal. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and thank you to Councilmember Gonzales for bringing this item forward. We're not new to this issue, of course, but we are seeing it in all of our districts now, not just the downtown or uptown. We have many constituents that have week after week during council meetings, raised concerns about the issue. I appreciate that it is very time and resource intensive as it relates to various city departments and the IT being. How do we address this issue? It's easy to say that it's just a health department issue or just a police issue when in actuality it's our entire city that needs to address this. So thank you to the staff that we have had for many years, especially Susan Price, who's worked on this with her heart and soul and spent her career here at the city doing her best and putting our best foot forward and reminding everyone that we are a city of great compassion. So thank you for your efforts. And as you go into looking at how we could better serve the homeless, I appreciate that the work that you'll be putting into it going forward. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Sorry, I had asked a question before. No, that's okay. No, no, it's all right. I just wanted to make sure I got that answered first, so. No, that's okay. That's all right. Good evening. We do have some answers from the questions that Suzanne will provide. A short report and then answer those questions will be coming back to you with a longer, more detailed report around the rest of the data. Perfect. Thank you. Councilwoman Pryce. Okay. I'm confused. Which confused him. Oh. You know what? We're going to do another price. Why don't why don't we do page 20 of the staff report on this? Absolutely. We have our entire homeless contingent from the Health and Human Services Department, our director, Kelly Colby, bureau manager Suzanne Price for her last meeting and also Teresa Chandler. So Kelly. All right, Susan Will. We'll start by answering some of the questions for which we have the data available, and then we will complete the rest of the report when we come back to Council on the Future. Honorable mayor and city council members. Just a very brief report on some of the information that's being requested. We do a biannual homeless count every two years, and our next one is coming up on January 26, 2017. We are accepting volunteers as we speak for that homeless count and will have some very robust information to update from our prior count that was listed in this item. Additionally, I want to mention that the Homeless Services Division comprises about a $10 million annual budget, primarily with the continuum of care, the emergency shelter grant dollars, and also some county funds, regional funds that we receive for homeless veterans. Our portfolio currently in the continuum of care, is about 28.8% in mental health services for both individuals and families in the city of Long Beach. That is about a $2 million annual contribution from the continuum of care. And then for families and children, that equates to about 14%, about $1 million in our annual continuum of care application is for families with children in Long Beach that are currently experiencing homelessness. And I know that there are other requests being asked here in for the detailed report that will be coming forward. We can outline a bit more of that in our inter-departmental collaborative work with the police department and other city departments on the issue of homelessness . Okay. Thank you very much. Let me I have some council comments first. I've got three those Councilwoman Price. Thank you. Thank you to the Health Department and Susan and your team for the excellent work that you have done. I had an opportunity to have a briefing with Kelly today, so we've talked a little bit about some of these issues. And I know that I've talked with Susan in the past about homeless issues and coming up with out of the box solutions that we can try. Even on a pilot basis in parts of the city, one of the things that I've noticed and I had the opportunity to go on a ride along with Long Beach PD two weeks ago, East Division Officer Dodson took me out and I had an opportunity to work with your homeless outreach team that reported, and I was just so incredibly impressed by the approach that they take when they approach these individuals. If it's a veteran, the specific veterans team goes out. If it's someone with mental illness, the mental illness specialists go out. But the problem that I saw that is of major concern to me is a large number of the people that we saw and we contacted. And Officer Dodson was great. We we approached these people with Officer Dodson, and it was honestly, it was life changing to be able to be up close and personal and do it with him. But a number of these people have substance abuse problems. And you don't want me to get on my Prop 47 train, but I think we're starting to see more and more of that, at least where I work every day. We're starting to see more and more people addicted to drugs, and that may lead to mental illness. But what we're seeing is people who are choosing to not accept the services that we have. So you should be commended for the amazing services and resources that we offer. But the problem, in my opinion, is what do you do about the people who don't want the services? What what is our plan? What's our solution? What are we going to be doing long term for those individuals? Because more and more people are choosing to be homeless. And the idea of getting treatment is not something that says enticing for them. Above and beyond that, however, we don't really have any treatment options available for them, so we really have nothing to give them, even if they wanted to participate in some sort of a long term treatment plan, nothing that's affordable that they can that we can get funding for. So that's an area where I hope once we get the data, we can kind of focus and see what are other cities doing. What kind of support can we get from the county to try to fund some substance abuse type programs? We I can't tell you how many bike chop shops we saw while we were out there. In fact, I was looking for my own bike. If anyone sees a red cruiser with Hawaiian flowers on it, that belongs to me. But there were some very high quality, you know, bike parts all over the place and along with hypodermic needles and all sorts of things that go along with the drug addicts on the streets, lifestyle, incredibly sad. A lot of young people out there who have so much potential, I'm sure. And so, you know, we I've expressed to Susan in the past that we want to be as involved as we can be, as the department will allow us to be, and trying to help find solutions and and even implement some of them in the third district to see what works. So I want to thank you for your work. Susan is on vacation. She came in special tonight. So I thought that in order to make her trip worthwhile, I would share with her. I'm not sure if she knows, but the Grunion Gazette today had a cover story about Susan. And I'm going to read the story because ever since she was named the homeless czar, I've received nothing but emails from people in Orange County asking me if I'm leaving the DA's office to become the homeless czar because Susan and I share a name identity theft. So the news flash from the grunion today. I was tired of being, quote, just another Susan Price. The original Susan Price leaves Long Beach to be a czar. In a surprising turn of events, the County of Orange recently announced that it would be stealing one of the city of long beaches, top employees Susan Price, in order to entice her to leave the more superior local government entity. Orange County Supervisors apparently gave Price the title of homeless czar. When asked what she thought about the move, Price said, How can you pass up a job with the czar in the title? The move comes as a big surprise to the other Susan Price, who serves as a councilwoman in Long Beach and goes by the nickname Susie Price. When asked what she thought about the move, Councilman Price said Maybe now people in Long Beach won't confuse our email addresses, according to the councilwoman over the past 18 months. Many emails intended for her went to Susan Price instead. Councilwoman Price qualified any inappropriate response a resident may have received from her as being from Susan Price, she said. If you received an email response to the effective, that sounds like a First World problem or seriously, are you kidding me with that complaint? That was likely from Susan, not Susie Price. In an unrelated development, we have learned that Susie Price was recently fired from her job and in Orange County. Apparently she went to her boss and demanded that she be called the prosecution czar. Tony Rackauckas was not amused. In other news, Orange County officials were caught on tape asking how they can be more like Long Beach. The new homeless czar of Orange County was late to work on her first day because all the buildings in Orange County look the same. The Real Housewives of Orange County want the homeless czar to get a makeover so she can fit in. In The O.C., Councilwoman Price is going to be sponsoring an agenda item forbidding the hiring of anyone named Susan Price, citing email confusion as the primary reason. And Councilman Price tells the homeless czar that she better get used to the title. The other Susan Price, now that she's coming to O.C. because karma is a you know what? So we wish you the best of luck. We're looking forward to having you. Well, I'm looking forward to having you in O.C., because we'll be working across the street practically from one another, so we'll be able to meet one another. Where the homeless are currently congregating between your office and mine. The tent city. That's where we can meet and have lunch together every once in a while. So congratulations on your new position, and thank you for everything you've done for us. Thank you, sister. I appreciate it. Councilman Andrew. Thank you. Thank you very much. I'm so glad to be able to be working with Susan Thursday night with the name of the czar. Maybe we can really solve a lot of problems. That's accessory. But I'm committed, my colleagues on this item because it's a great compassion, you know, for our residents who have become homeless or as homeless. You know, and I would like to ask you as a friendly if that's okay with council, I mean, you know, to include the report, what is step to, you know, the city of Long Beach and has taken a recommendation to implement from October four, you know, 2004, there was a ten year strategy in homelessness. So if she would like that, I don't know what she's made her, you know, a motion yet, but if you like, I like to use as a friendly. Yes. You know, I'd like to have a recommend it. Take the recommendation and implement from the Oct 204 ten year, you know, ready to end homelessness. So what are the steps in the city of Long Beach that's been taken? What steps have been taken by the recommendation implemented from October 2004? What steps has been taken? So just. Yeah, just taking that information. Yes, that's kind of combining the two. Sure. We can do that if. That would be fine with you. Councilman, you Ringa. Thank you, Mary. And I want to add my voice and congratulations to Susan Price, not Susie and her appointment to Orange County. I had the honor of working with Susan for a number of years when I was at the Health Department, and we worked a lot on some of these issues that she had. But aside from that, I have some questions, obviously. My district runs by well, a river runs through it. As I always like to say, the L.A. River and the L.A. River is a hotbed of homelessness. It appears there are always there. And it seems like every time that there is a sweep or a cleanup, they're back almost, almost immediately. So maybe you can help me understand the the partnership that the city has with the county of Los Angeles and Caltrans and what they do for outreach and environmental cleanups as it relates to the river and to the flood control and other areas that are highly appealable. Appeal appealable to the homeless to have their encampments. Is there. And let me explain. I guess I should explain what I want here. Every time that I get a complaint from a resident or a constituent relate regarding the homeless encampment along the river or along the freeway, we have to go through some hoops to get them out. So maybe you can can you explain for my purpose, as well as the constituents who are out there in terms of what the process is that we have to go through in order to get such encampments out of the way, out of sight. We're looking for that in the future. REPORTER Are you looking for a response now? Well, if you're not right now, obviously, yes. But if not, then I would have to wait to the report. That's fine. That's ready tonight. That's fine. We have a, you know, the current efforts. Okay. Council member Urunga Ah ah. Inter-departmental collaboration extends to a regional collaboration with the LA County Public Works Flood Control District, as well as Caltrans and a number of other. There's railroad land and a number of other areas along the L.A. River corridor. The Health Department and the police department work collaborative collaboratively with these jurisdictional land authorities because the police department and the health department are basically managing the entire city of Long Beach jurisdiction, even though those land management areas may change. And so, you know, there's been a lot of collaboration over the years with that. And L.A. County has become very diligent in doing very frequent maintenance operations along the flood control. It is a infrastructure item, not necessarily a place safe for human habitation, as we all know. And so our outreach teams are out there very regular, regularly monitoring. You know, the things that belong to the city of Long Beach primarily are the bridges, but the rest of the flood control is L.A. County jurisdiction. And so we we work hand-in-hand with them on addressing those issues. And, you know, historically, there were anywhere upwards of 400 people along the L.A. River from Queensway Bay Bridge all the way up to Artesia. It hasn't been like that in a number of years, but we're starting to see an increase along the L.A. River corridor, as well as the increase, you know, that we're dealing with citywide. Yeah. And that's and that's my concern is that there seems to be a much more emboldened, if you will, homeless community that is making those encampments there. I mean, there's an encampment right off of a will. And and and the and the river the freeway right there where it's just like taking over a whole spa. Looks like a mansion. But and I know that we've had a couple of cleanups in that in that area. However, it seems like they come back almost the next day. Is there any kind of follow up? Is there is there follow up from the police department or the other agencies? When we clean out, we have a sweep or whatever, clean up, clean out of that area. Is there any follow up immediately? Like to make sure that they don't come back? It appears like from from one day to the next they're just back at it again. Is there is there some kind of follow up that we have on it? Council member. I think that, you know, we have struggled with resource from both the street outreach perspective as well as our work with the police department on managing the various hotspot locations that we have throughout the city, as well as the two river corridors that we maintain, the San Gabriel and the L.A. River. So when you say resources, you're talking about manpower, wind power. People power. People power. All right. Well, it's a little frustrating for me, obviously, because I'm getting these I mean, almost on a daily basis, I'm getting a complaint of an encampment right at the exit, individuals who are unkempt and very highly visible to the public, and it's just unsightly. I wish that once this report is done that we can also come back with some solutions as to how we can make it more lasting. And I know that what happens on many occasions is that when we might. Have a sweep or a cleanup and they end up going into the neighborhoods. So we need some more real, lasting solutions to this issue because they're not going away. In fact, we're finding that they're increasing. So we need to find more solutions to this situation that be reactive by being proactive. Thank you. Thank you. Council member Supernanny. Thank you. Regarding the Grunion article, I noticed the date on that was May 22nd and I believe the Go Forth Friday newsletter scooped the grunion there. Apologies to Harry Salts gave her, but we ran an article titled Susan Price not Susie headed to Orange County and we covered her fell farewell party. And Susan, you mentioned me in your farewell address and thank you for that. And that was very humbling. And I appreciate that. I would. You had a quote on on Thursday night, Susan, and it was about I'll put you on the spot here. It's about the 1% factor. And I just want to commend you for how much your department has done that. If we go by the statistics, the homeless population in Long Beach should be much larger than it actually is. And due to your diligence and your great work, it's a fraction of the size. Is it actually, which I'd like you to kind of elaborate on that formula and how you work that. Council member super. And I was referring to the 1% of any city's population that the national statistic would be homeless. And within the city of Long Beach, being a city of half a million people, that should be around 5000 people. But in our 2015 homeless count, which I have right here, it's 2345. And I really attribute that to a perfect storm that started in 1987 with the Task Force on Homelessness that had a vision to create a coordinated entry point, which in 1999 it realized in the Multi-Service Center over on the west side of the city. The other part of that perfect storm was that the Base Realignment and Closure Act that created the 26 acre villages at Cabrillo, which the original conveyance was somewhere around 860 people that would be housed in affordable housing to date were up around 1300, I believe, with some additional phases of development, housing and affordability over there at the villages at Cabrillo. So, you know, this is a this is a model system of care. I've been very fortunate to be a part of it all of these years, but ultimately it works very well. And it is an interdepartmental collaboration between all the different departments to try to mitigate street homelessness as well as address service, service needs and housing needs of our populations. So every department has been involved in that. Thank you for that explanation. And I think we know that we're going to stay after this. We're going to work very hard on the issues. My counsel there certainly has my first year in office, but I just wanted to commend you at this time for the great work in the past. Thank you. Councilmember Richardson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I want to just first acknowledge our health department, and particularly Susan Price, who's done a fantastic job within this space. I've had the chance to work with her on the Windows Winter Shelter for a number of years, and it's been a great experience. And the residents have really, you know, have they're comfortable with our winter shelter. So I want to start off by just acknowledging her. I want to I want to just mention. I don't think it makes as much sense for me to point out the small new nuances. But we have some major issues that we have to think big about, and I'm hoping that this is an opportunity to talk about them. So, one, we need a long term plan for winter shelter. So there's not an emergency every year. We've talked about that, but that's something that I hope can be addressed in this report. We need to talk about the expansion of shelters in general within our city. I think with within the conversation about the L.A. River restoration, the I 17 corridor project in the 1991 freeway modernization, I think now is an important time to start thinking about how our interests, how those projects can align to fix what I believe is one of the one of the unsafe is freeway intersections with hundreds of people living living under that freeway intersection when I'm talking about the 1791. So if anyone goes down down in that area, there are literally hundreds of tents that you can only see on unless you cannot see from the public. Residents cannot see it. But if you take one or two of the on ramps or off ramps, you can see it. And the fact is, it's there. It's unsafe. It's not. It's within the city of Long Beach, but not on our agency. It's going to be very difficult to to fix this. But this is one of the worst interchanges in Southern California with some of the the most difficult homeless issue. So I hope that we have an opportunity to really think big and talk about leveraging these large scale projects to finally talk about this. Carlton Boston. Yes, thank you. And I want to express my congratulations to Susan Price for her, her role now in Orange County as designer of homelessness. Thank you for your great service to the city of Long Beach. You've been great to work with. I also want to thank Councilmember Gonzalez for allowing me to sign on to this. This item, obviously, I think homeless. This is becoming fast becoming the most serious issue facing our city on many levels, I think. I'm glad we're talking about this because we do have a more responsibility to address this issue and take on the challenge . I don't think we have much of a choice. It's our burden to share together. And leadership and governance is not easy. We're going to have to make tough decisions and lead on these issues. I think to effectively address this is going to require, and I'd like to use the basketball analogy is going to require a full court press from this entire city. From all departments, and we should also be prepared to commit more resources locally to deal with the problem. It's a complicated issue because it mostly deals with adults with substance abuse problems and as I mentioned, mental illness, poverty and the numbers are good here in the city of Long Beach, I guess if you look at the national trend, but they're still not acceptable and they are increasing. We specifically I get complaints in and I think we all get complaints from constituents about this issue. And most of the time, constituents are not complaining about the homeless. They want to do something more to help. Right. We have and Rex mentioned the L.A. River councilmember. You want to mention the L.A. River? We are having we are about to go into construction along with the forest wetlands. And we know that hundreds of homeless live in that area. We need a plan to deal with that once we start construction. They're living under our freeways. We just recently did a river cleanup with the friends of the L.A. River. And I was pretty, pretty it was pretty eye opening to go underneath the freeway underpass and see how people were living and the sheer numbers of people living under one little freeway underpass, our alleys, along our business corridors and oftentimes behind our residents, the homeless are saying no camps, our city parks. And most recently in I got a call at about 7:00 in the morning, just about a week ago with somebody set up right in broad daylight on Atlantic Avenue and 46th Street in Bixby Knolls on the sidewalk. I think the homeless are crying out and seeking attention, and we we have to respond. Of the 2300 homeless that we have, I think the staff report says that 1500 are unsheltered. I had a question for staff. How many? What is our capacity right now to provide shelter to the homeless with that? So I understand somewhere around we have 832 sheltered individuals, according to the staff report. Are we at capacity there? Somewhat of a more complicated question because the homeless count report only reflects beds that are designated for homeless persons. However, in on any given day in the city of Long Beach, there could be 1500 people sheltered in in programs like drug and alcohol programs that are not specifically designated for homeless population specifically. This report is a HUD report. So it's only those that are like homeless emergency shelter, homeless transitional programs. There's a number of other programs where people are referred and where people are sheltered or staying in transitional awaiting permanent housing placements. So in answer to your question is probably more like 1500. Unsheltered or. Sheltered, sheltered emergency and transitional. Okay. Thank you so much. And I guess I don't expect an answer tonight. Oh, I did have one other question. In terms of the work that we do as a city. How many outreach workers do we actually have to go out and provide services and do outreach to to the homeless in our city? The city of Long Beach employs three street outreach workers, but the Street Outreach Network is relatively robust. How many would you say? About 20 different hours. Join the outreach network and that consist of. Sure the outreach network is basically all of the agencies that are funded in the continuum of care and it includes veteran outreach workers, mental health outreach workers. Let's see, there are help me out. De Alba, the quality of life unit with the police department. The three staff that we have, we're the Gateway Cities COG folks. I mentioned Mental Health America. Okay. I'd like to know more about that. Our capacity to do that and what exactly the mission is when we when we're doing outreach. And again, that can come back. I would like to add a friendly of Councilmember Gonzalez that that we received some sort of recommendation from staff to improve our capacity to house homeless both in transitional and permanent housing. If you're open to that. Are you suggesting options that they come back with or choosing? Yes. That sounds good. Sounds good. Thank you. Hello. It's on the side. Okay. Sorry goes on. Thanks, Mr. Lowenthal. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I know that this item that was authored by Councilwoman Gonzales is asking for the state of our homelessness and the state of the services that we provide. But I think I know Councilwoman Gonzales well enough to know that it's really to lay the framework for the larger conversation that I know she and others on this council would like to have when this report comes back. I will not be on this council. And I wanted to just share some thoughts about this larger conversation. Some of my colleagues have alluded to it. I think our staff has alluded to it. But when we look at cities, communities and states that address the very same issues that we're discussing tonight, we see that there is perhaps a conceptual shift that's taking place for a very long time. We assume that you would have to deal with the issues that homeless residents. Present themselves with, such as drug addiction, abuse, mental illness, all the things that we are aware of, we talk about and I know that our staff struggle with to help address. And I'm looking at my. Friends and colleagues from the domestic violence community who know very well how it is when a victim presents herself or himself and has multiple diagnosis. And how do you approach that? And perhaps what we've been doing for far too long as a city and a community and a society is overcomplicating, adding tremendous amount of complexity to something that's quite basic, which is a fundamental need, and that's housing. And so. If we could in the larger conversation that you will all have and I will watch from home or here and be inspired by. If I can hope that you would have the conversation about just how do we come forward as a city that places Housing First? And I know we're doing a pilot project to Mr. City managers that at The Villages. Yes. So it's a housing first approach, which is housing. No questions asked. No conditions, no strings attached. So when you look at Central Florida and you look at the state of Utah, which I know many of us may not expect progressive actions to come out of the state of Utah. But I. I beg to differ. I beg to differ. If you look at their approach to homelessness, it's quite progressive. The state legislature has funded. Housing for homeless individuals without strings attached. And that conceptual shift is called Housing First. And so I would like to see our city move in that direction, which is do not put these conditions that you must be clean and sober and you must be this and you must be that in order for us to provide housing. That is a very, very, very strict and and somewhat conservative but misguided approach, because if we are concerned about our residents and housing our residents, we shouldn't attach all these conditions to it. If we want to ask ourselves, why are people settling into settlements along freeway embankments in places that we just know are so dangerous? We have to look at ourselves and see what conditions perhaps we may be placing, what requirements that we may place. Our staff our staff does a tremendous job. And I'm very. I'm I'm I'm glad that we are less than the 1%. Councilwoman Gonzales reminded me that when we do our homeless count, those are the folks that we can count. So I'm not sure if if there is a better way to get an exact count, but however we reduce it is always a success. But if I can urge my colleagues to look at how we approach solving homelessness. Understanding the state of homelessness. Understanding the resources that we have and that we are currently applying. But what are the guidelines? What is the guiding principles that this council is going to give its staff when it comes to addressing homelessness? If just like Vision Zero, we are working toward zero collisions that you have to have a guiding principle. So I hope we can be bold enough to say to our staff, housing first. And then let the professionals address the other issues. But if we are about getting our people off our streets, let's not tie any strings to them. Thank you. Councilman Gonzales. I just wanted to thank everyone for their thoughtful comments. I know this is a very large subject, and I wanted to touch on a few things that I think were very important to many of our residents. And I also wanted to include in here a time frame as to when we can come back. So I'll request that this information come back within 90 days and then we can go forward from there. But I thank my colleagues for this information. Mayor Councilmembers This is such a large topic. I don't think there's any way we can come back in 90 days. I'm going to talk to Kelly for a suggest. What would be realistic? Theresa Yeah. Six months. We were going through the continuum of care application. We were planning for a homeless count and we've lost our bureau manager. So if you could give us six months, I would appreciate that. Thank you. Okay. Six months is fine. But if we can, you know, I understand with this, you know, everything, considering we'll. Come back. It will come back at 90 days or 90 day increments with updates. So you'll see an update. That we're happy with. Yeah, yeah. This is timely and I just want to make sure that we're on track and we don't get it, you know, another year. And no, we think we can bring you data, the specific data that you requested in a report in terms of the additional planning conversations that have been going, we'll need longer time to to spend more time planning for those and to present those in a report. That would be great. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Public comment on this item. Please come forward. Hello. My name is Joanna Ferraro. I am a resident of downtown, so I pay a mortgage. I also own a small business and I do not get a paycheck to work with our people experiencing homelessness in our city. No one is paying me. I've had a father die as a homeless man and I've been in the trenches over ten years. So where I'm coming from is I need to see downtown Long Beach thrive because I'm invested 100%. And number two, I have some personal experience with this. And number three, I was told when I came to Long Beach, I went to a meeting which you were at and listen to a lot of people complain about the homelessness issue here in downtown or in Long Beach. And I asked one simple question when I really demanded the mic and I said, you know, thank you for all you do. And I still continue to say that because a lot of people cannot do what you do. They can't. It takes very thick skin. So thank you for what you're doing. But what is it that we can do to help? And since then, that's been over a year and I've done nothing but research. I've been working with every program with Alice and Crip, Steve at Dolby, Dolby to Beacon for him, villages. MH And done ride alongs with our quality of life officers. I've been doing nothing but research on my own because this is something I care very much about. And I again, I don't get paid to do this. But I will say this the one thing I'm learning, I had to write in my hand because I have to do that and get my notes on. The one thing I learned is that community education is key. And even hearing what you guys said, there's myths and actual sentences. US council members said right now, which tells me we need to educate you first and foremost, because I just heard you guys say myths not to put anyone on blast, but I was like, Oh my gosh, they don't know. They think they don't know the information. They need to know that. And I literally put together 40 a 45 minute PowerPoint, and it's the nine collaborative truths. And what it is, is is every single entity that is working in the trenches. Have said. To me over and over again, It's not jio's words. It is their words. They are the ones getting their hands dirty every day. So what is it? They agree that our community, our leaders need to know? What is it that we need to educate because they need more cheerleaders? Because when they have a title, they're going to get some people listening to them and some go at your views. A little skewed because you work for the city. So I didn't do that. I got my hands dirty and figured out what those truths are. Those truths need to be spread and educated. We need to understand our outreach workers and respect what they do and really listen to them. We need to fill the gap. The gap is that we aren't getting people accepting our services because there's a gap and we need to understand how to get that gap, dissipate that gap. We need to use preventative aspects to my time's going to run out on me. Preventative. No one wants to talk about the preventatives of homelessness. Where's our economy at? Where's minimum wage? Where are jobs at? No one's talked about that part. There's a preventative way to homelessness, too, right. We've got to look at those other things in our in our society. Last but not least, we need to involve our community leaders like me and Alice and Chris, who do this for no paycheck but care that much about this downtown in our community. Thank you. Thank you to you. Excellent. Next speaker, please. Good evening. My name is Sharon we with Interval House. And tonight I'm also here as co-chair for the Long Beach Continuum of Care for the Homeless and on behalf of the 20 diverse and very passionate agencies working and aiming to end homelessness in our community, we are excited to be come back also to help with whatever information the city is going to provide. But we wanted to take this opportunity to say thank you to our housing leader, Susan Price. And Susan has been a visionary and she has guided our collective efforts and she has helped shape Long Beach to be a model of the United States in solving and ending the issue of homelessness. And it's something that we're very, very proud of. We know there's more work to be done, but it's something that HUD, seeing what has been so effective and successful here, is now encouraging communities across our nation to create a collective, coordinated system like the one we started here at the Multi-Service Center. And so that's something that we as a community should feel proud of at Interval House. We also serve victims. We serve victims of domestic violence, primarily so many that end up homeless because they are fleeing life threatening violence in their own homes. And Susan and the city has helped us expand very critical housing programs that have literally saved lives. And for that, we're also very thankful to you. We have, under Susan's leadership, really created something that has been decreasing the numbers of homelessness in our city. And we are seeing an end to veteran homelessness. That's something that we haven't really talked about tonight, but that's something that is something that has been a collective effort and something that is real. And we only hope to continue that work. So we want to thank you, Susan, for taking us along your journey and being a part of that and for fighting for the homeless people and for changing lives in a way that no one else could. And we have a lot more work to be done. And we. Need to do more to end homelessness in our community. And we're going to take what you taught us, what you gave us, and we're going to move forward. I see and I hear a lot of interest among our communities, leaders and in our community. And we are only going to keep moving and we're going to make you proud and we love you. And we're going to miss. You immensely. And we're proud to see what's heading your way. So thank you for letting me. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hikers soon come into the house. I wanted to add. A few things to watch her and she say so beautifully. And tonight. I'm here also as a resident of the city of Long Beach. And so I'm also talking on behalf of a community. And I want to. Take this opportunity to thank. You. Suzanne, for the work done. We have done we have. Worked with you for. Over a. Decade on. Working toward. Ending homelessness. And I want to thank you for your commitment. Your hard work, your dedication. To ending. Domestic violence. And thank you for. Always having a open door policy and following and for being a wonderful leaders. And you're leaving, but you're leaving behind you. An amazing staff. That has been very. Well trained. You are leaving programs that have been implemented. And to really work toward ending. Homelessness and everything that you leave behind, you will. Continue your legacy. So thank you for everything you have done. Thank you. Next week put. Hi. I'm Alison Crisp. Most of you know, thank you for having me up here right now. First of all, I want to say I'm. Super bummed you're leaving. Thank you so much. For letting me leave long messages on your voicemail for as many times as I did. Although you guys don't let enough room to leave long messages on your voicemail. Just kidding. But serious. I have been not only just to hear. To reiterate what Giovanna. Had. Just mentioned a few minutes ago, but to also personally say, I don't think we're personally all going to hear and end homelessness. I think what we're going to need to focus here. And this comes. From myself as well, being a volunteer within the community and learning a lot within the past three years. I am a downtown business owner. And I just moved to Councilmember Orange as a. District. Thank you. I'm very I love living over there. So I understand where you're talking. About and where you're coming from. There is so much complexity to this issue. Me just being one person taking it on myself. I've actually working with Friends of Linkin Park for a couple of years ago when. I first started volunteering with them. I, I became friends with some of them that were living at the park and. Most recently helped one of them. Find housing with not just me, but that village. That is along here. That has helped get her. Housing. It takes one person at a time for those that are just not only on our hard working council and our wonderful Health and Human Services Department. That it it's what we are able to provide for our city. Is an incredible amount of outreach that helps each person individually. Our quality of life team, our caseworkers, our outreach team, our our our volunteers that are within the city that. Are out there every day, talking to. People, handing out all the type of resource cards that we have. It's not. It's an education. It's going to take some time and we're all going to be. A part of it. We all have to take accountability for it, and we all have to be a part of of this daily, daily, daily. I don't want to say it's not a problem. Daily. Complex issue. Thank you guys so much. Congratulations. I'm super bummed you're leaving, but who's taking your place? Oh, yeah. Theresa Chandler, homeless services office. Congratulations, Theresa. Yeah. Very good. You could look as it is. Sorry to see you go. First time I've seen you in person. Talk to you in a number of times. Thank you. As one who spends a great deal of time up in downtown L.A. and, quite frankly, a good portion of L.A. County. Whatever, populate whatever our homeless issue is now, you can expect it to at least double within the next two or three years. L.A. is on a full court press to. Move them out and guess where they're coming. Want to share with you an idea that some of you may have gotten an email from a relative to a specific segment of. Potentially. Homeless people were heading that off and pursuant to the fruit, if we can get their approval and I think we will be getting that from the Secretary of Veteran Affairs. There is an area down in the Marine Stadium which again, it was the area that I was dealing with the last couple weeks. Next to a building called eight. And in between that eight end structure and the there's a a storage area there for both people that have the water ski and towboats and so forth. What I am going to suggest is that what we will do is get, I believe, either eight or excuse me, 12 to 16 Airstream type trailers. And those will be for. Combat troops that are now in a program as they're going through the programs of the VA. And there are about one or two steps away from. Coming out into society 100% or as close to 100% as they can stability. And what prompted that idea was, one, I had been focusing in on that specific area, as mentioned last week or for a few weeks before. But then then the last couple of days, again, which I think many people saw, I have seen on TV, the Expos, the TV chronicling the programs, chronicling what Prince Harry has been doing with his combat veterans, so forth, and it just all merged into one. So I think that's a great location. It is only a five minute walk to two bus stops, which we would put into any place, and particularly the VA. And when we have a new A-10 that's going to be fashioned in such a manner that it will have the showers, which will be available only to them and to kids on the field trips and also special events 10 to 12 times a year. It will not be an open public restroom, but I think it's a serene setting. If you haven't, if you're not familiar with the area, go down there, look for eight end and then walk north on that green grass and that stretch. And that's. Thank you, Mr.. Good to you. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Back to the council. Council's already made their comments. Please cast your votes. Yeah. Watching Kerry's. Okay. Just as a reminder to the council, we have a long agenda still left. So we're going to continue to try to get through it the best we can. Different people have to leave at different moments. And so I'm just trying to make sure that we have quorum. There's a lot of issues still ahead of the council, so I'm gonna try to get through some of these quickly. Item 13, please. 13, Madam Clerk.

Recommendation to receive supporting documentation into the record, conclude the public hearing and take the actions necessary to adopt the Fiscal Year 2017 budget as listed in Attachment A. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_09062016_16-0809

Councilwoman Gonzalez. Councilmember Pearce. Councilwoman Price. Councilmember Superman here. Councilwoman Mongo. Councilman Andrews. Councilmember Otunga. Councilman Austin. Vice Mayor Richardson. Mayor Garcia. I'm here. Thank you. We're going to go ahead and do the budget items that are the leftover voter budget items that Councilman Mongo is going to walk us through. So I turn this over to her and I believe there's probably five or six items that we need to vote on. So. Councilwoman Mongo. So today at our Budget Oversight Committee, we were looking to pull push through, not push through remote up from the Budget Oversight Committee, several budgets. Lia has the specific item numbers, but it is water, gas and oil, the port and the fee schedule with the exception of one fee schedule item that will be set aside to be further discussed at next week's Budget Oversight Committee for a decision recommendation to the city. I hope that we have your support. Thank you. STEM. Hey, Mr. Mayor and members of Council. So we are asking for four passages, items 1.1, which is the the Board of Harbor Commissioners budget, and that's $774 million items 1.5, which is the master fee and set charges schedule with the exception of pirate fees. Items 1.7, which is the Long Beach Community Investment Company budget of $11.4 million. I had a 1.8, which is a motion to approve the transfer from a $17.8 million from the Harbor Revenue Fund and then items 1.9, which is the recommendation to adopt a resolution establishing the Gann appropriations limit. And you will need to take votes on each item and I can answer any questions on each item as they come forward. Thank you, Councilman Mongo. I think that the committee and the department heads, along with the city staff, have looked at this thoroughly and we are recommending them as originally proposed. We have a. Are you going to walk us through through each one separately? How are we going to do it? So since there are no adjustments from the original presentations that this body saw, we thought that any of those questions would have previously been answered at those budget presentations. If the council is comfortable with that. Actually, Mr. Mays, I think we have to take each one individually. Correct. We do have to take each motion individually because some of them entail adopting ordinances, some of them until we just. Don't need a staff report on each of them. Correct? Oh, that's correct. Okay. Just checking. Okay. But we do need to do we do need to do public comment on each one. We do have to take public comment on each one. That's correct. We could do that all at once. I'd rather do that. Okay. So let's we'll do public comment on the first item and then we'll just we'll close that for for the rest. So let's begin with the first one. Are is staff going to read them or is Councilman Mongo going to read each one? Leo Will. Okay.

Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach municipal Code by amending Chapter 2.78 relating to the sale of unclaimed property, read and adopted as read. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_05122020_20-0391

Communication from city attorney recommendation declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code relating to the sale of unclaimed property read and adopted as read citywide. I got a motion in a place. Okay. There is a motion. Actually, I didn't get a. Okay. Councilman concerns and they have set in motion. And Councilmember Pierce to the second councilmember today has. Supportive Counselor Pierce part of. Okay. Did you have any comments? Concern, Richardson? I think that was zero. No comment. Okay. Okay, then let's go ahead and cancel your anger. Did you have any comments on this or was that the last one? Good to go. Okay, then I'll go ahead and do a roll call of District one. I district to. I District three. I'm District four. I District five. I. District six. By. District seven. District seven. By. District eight. Right. District nine. I. Motion carries. Motion carries. Thank you. That concludes the rest of the agenda. Let me go ahead and. On just new business. I just do want us to. Say, I think we're missing an item. We're missing a couple of items, items 12, 13, 14 and 15. Huh? You're right. Those actually are not even on my roll call order here, so I will go back. To those items. Hold on 1/2. I'm just looking at the. Okay. So item item 13. Item 12.

A bill for an ordinance appointing Julia C. Yeckes to serve as a member of the Board of Ethics. Appoints Julia C. Yeckes to fill a vacated term on the Board of Ethics beginning immediately and ending 4-20-17. The Committee approved filing this bill at its meeting on 11-1-16.

DenverCityCouncil_11072016_16-1059

Thank you, Mr. President. This is an appointment to the Board of Ethics. The City Council makes several appointments to the board, as does the mayor's office. And this is the board that interprets the code of ethics. We don't often have folks that we appoint to boards and commissions present in the chambers, but we do tonight. So I just wanted to acknowledge the presidents of our appointee, Ms.. Julia Jaquez, who's here in the audience today. And for the purposes of my council colleagues, I wanted to just let you know that we were not clear about this in committee, but this appointment is to fill the remaining portion of the term that was scheduled for Brian Spano, our former appointee who resigned. And so this appointment will be to finish that term through May of 2017. And to clarify that, since that was New Science Committee. And with that, I just want to thank Ms.. Jaquez and as this is part of the consent agenda, to encourage us all to be supportive, but to thank her for her time and service. Thank you and welcome to City Council Chambers. And for those in the public council mechanics over the Finance and Governance Committee, which the Ethics Board reports to. And so that is why she is leading that. Okay. Thank you.

Recommendation to adopt Specifications No. RFQ AP15-203 and award a contract to Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc., of Fort Worth, TX, to provide a comprehensive Feasibility Study for a Federal Inspection Service Facility at the Long Beach Airport, in an amount not to exceed $349,845, for a period of one year; authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary to enter into the contract, including any necessary amendments thereto; and Increase appropriations in the Airport Fund (EF 320) in the Airport Department (AP) by $349,845. (District 5)

LongBeachCC_01192016_16-0015

Okay. Thank you. Let's see. Next up, can we get the next item, please? I believe. Item number 717. Report from Long Beach Airport recommendation to award a contract to Jacobs Engineering Group to provide a comprehensive feasibility study for a Federal Inspection Service facility at the Long Beach Airport in an amount not to exceed $349,000. District five. Mr. WEST. Mr. Mayor. Council members, this has been before the Council a. Couple of times for tonight's meeting. Our executive director of the airport, Bryant Francis, is going to talk about awarding this contract for the study. Good evening, Mayor Garcia, members of council. On July 7th, 2015, City Council authorized the city manager to proceed with the project to conduct a feasibility study regarding the potential development of the Federal Inspection Services Facility at Long Beach Airport. The airport immediately began working with purchasing department to prepare a request for qualifications for RFQ on August 28th in RFQ was issued by the city's purchasing department. Next, a pre statement of qualifications meeting was held in early September with potential proposers. On September 23rd, the deadline to submit statements of qualification. Three proposers officially stated interest after internal review. All proposers were deemed qualified and were notified by purchasing of the opportunity to present to an evaluation committee consisting of airport and purchasing staff on October 12th. Of the three presentations, the evaluation committee believed Jacobs to be the strongest and best suited for this project. Therefore, in late October, Jacobs Engineering was requested to submit a scope of services as well as a cost proposal, both of which were received several weeks later. After reaching a successful agreement on scope and fees with the airport purchasing, posted the notice of intent to award to Jacobs Engineering Group on December 14th. This began a ten day protest period of which none were received. Jacobs Engineering is one of the industry's leading providers of global comprehensive aviation services. They propose to use in-house consultants and a short list of subcontract consultants to conduct the study. The components of the study will include airport market analysis, airport scope and capability, financial feasibility, economic impact, assessment of environmental impact and security risk assessment. The City Attorney's Office will conduct a risk assessment of the potential threats to the airport noise control ordinance and a plan to mitigate impact at neighborhoods and schools from environmental and health impacts. Should the airport noise control ordinance become invalidated? Please note that this component will not be covered by Jacobs sports consultants. I felt it important to mention, however, as it was a direct counsel request to have this component included as part of the overall study. And it will be covered. An additional counter request was to hold community meetings. We will work with Council District offices to schedule those meetings that would like to convene a meeting for the airports east side or districts four and five and another for the airport's west side or for District seven and eight. These meetings will be to formally introduced the feasibility study team, review the components of the work which will be conducted, and to answer questions and which in the meetings to be in an open house format and that they will be held very close together in date, helping to keep costs in line as members from each firm will be represented and many will be traveling from outside of the area. Based upon the timeline submitted by Jacobs. And barring any delays, the findings of the feasibility study will be finalized in July 2016. Staff will return to city council with members of the Jacobs team to present those findings soon thereafter, likely in August. Tonight, Mr. Ron Siki of Jacobs Engineering is here and is available to address the Council should you have any direct questions for him? This concludes my report and we are happy to take questions at this time. There is a motion in a second, but Councilman Mongo and Councilman Price. Did you have it? Do you have it? Do you wanna go to the public? Councilman. Okay, any. Any members of the public want to speak on this? This is a contact. Adam, please come forward. Very good to see you guys. I'm just curious what to make sure that when we've had these community meetings, have we reached out to the four year olds, the five year olds, the seven year olds, the pictures of the people that were here last week and here today? I think we should get their viewpoint, even though they're, you know. In most cases do not are not 18 and don't have the cognitive skills that as you hopefully advance in age, you do get to forget. And I recognize there's a good intent. But let's make sure that. When we get input, we get it from mines that are fully developed. All right. Thank you. And I recognize oftentimes some of the decisions you make do not suggest that they're made by developed mines. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Thank you. Good evening, Mayor and Council. My name is Laura Silver. My address is on file. I'm a resident of Long Beach. I am opposed. To the scope. Of the International Airport. Expansion Feasibility study. I'm not opposed to the study. But as it stands before you, it has. Frightening implications. Because staff. Has bundled with project. Design and last. Year Council voted in. July to proceed with a fact finding and. Fact. Facing a research project. You stated fact. Based decision making is how you want it to proceed, and I applaud you for that. And I just urge you with. I know many. Of you have graduate. Studies to. Refer to your background in research design and the principles of research design are that you look for the facts and then the facts inform you whether to proceed or not. One of the facts. Are, well, some. Information I have here is this is from city. Prosecutor Doug Halbert on to. 2015 in February. We're just a casualty of another airline wants into the airport and all slots are allocated. So to answer the question, which is a great question. The crisis will. Come when someone sees an opportunity here in. Long Beach so that the type of opportunity will dictate who challenges us and in what form. If a judge simply wipes out the entire ordinance, Long Beach would have no local control. No direct control, even though we own. The. Airport. Aviation landings all handled by the federal government. The fact that we have a curfew and night, you can't fly over the lateral runways. 25 are so bad now that Councilman Mongo is your area that's protected with the ordinance. Without the ordinance. It's a frightening prospect. So going into an international. It's a very. Risky. For all of us, those of us who live in the airport impacted areas. We know that. We don't want that for you. And so I would urge you to look at the scope of this. Feasibility study. And don't go into a almost shovel ready design. Just see if you want to go with it. Or rather. So it's a matter of adjusting the scope of this. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Joe Sopel My address is online, Mr. Mayor. City Council Members and Staff. Council Members Mongeau Pryce, Gonzalez, Lowenthal, Andrews and Richardson. Have a choice. Instead of unwisely. Spending $349,000 on whether allowing Customs facility at Long Beach Airport might be. Feasible, they should make it. They should make a joint. Substitute motion that we hope council members, your Ranger Super Now and Austin would support. To first direct. A serious study, analyze and overdue discussion. To first decide whether to expose the. City to a new. And uncontrolled risk. To the only protection Long Beach currently has from locally unregulated flights. With no nighttime curfew in all runways. At all times. It is a fact. Not an opinion, that if a. Long Beach Council majority. Were to allow a customs facility desired by one tenant. Which is JetBlue. The city would be powerless to limit it to one carrier. The Council's approval of a customs. Facility would effectively incentivize provide the economic bait, enabling an entirely new class of countless international operators, passenger and cargo to seek flight slots that might be unavailable under Long Beach's protective ordinance. The minute all slots are filled, any one of that entirely new, large and powerful class of international operators would have an incentive. To potentially destroy Long Beach is protective airport ordinance. Mm hmm. If Long Beach airport management has. $349,000 to spare, I urge the Council to divert that some to be put aside as part of a permanent legal defense fund to continually. Protect our ordinance from those who could do us harm. Instead of inviting others to do so. I stood in front of you when we talked about an FBI study, and I thought 5 to $10000 was going to be a lot of money for this study. And now staff is asking for $349,000. If you vote yes on that tonight, you're effectively voting yes on international flights. Thank you. Next week, please. John Doe lottery address on file. Mayor. City Council. First, I'd just like to say a long. Line out there. I'd give some kudos to the strong start. There are probably good 20 of them that were. Hoping to get in here. And weren't able to. So. Are you guys going to have a long night? It'd be nice to be up here tonight to thank you for declining fees. Unfortunately, that's not the case. Instead, I ask why waste $385,000 before you even see if an office could put our noise ordinance at risk? All of you are on record stating that you are in support of the noise ordinance and don't want to put us at risk or it at risk. I would request that you pay an outside counsel like the one that defended us in 2001. Against. American Airlines. To even see if the noise ordinance is at risk. If we move forward with an office, why spend that 385,000? You know, as recently stated that the state of the city is strong. And I just put to you that we do not need an international airport to continue making this a strong city. We need more. Police. We need more fire. We need infrastructure. We don't need an office. That's not going to bring any money to our general fund. So, again, I would request that you if anything, let's look at the noise ordinance first. And if that's the case that it's not going to cause any issues, then move forward. Don't waste $395,000. Thank you. Makes bigger peace. Good evening. I'm Marshal. Dostoevsky. I live in Bixby Knolls. I oppose this. This international facility. And, you know, I just wanted to. Say that the one thing that this is going to do, this is only going to benefit JetBlue. I mean, JetBlue is in a kind of in a bad situation because they are competing with Southwest Airlines. Southwest Airlines goes to Mexico, goes to the Caribbean. JetBlue is based out of Long Beach. Doesn't have the the flights to go to. Doesn't have the right to go to Mexico because there's no international facility. And I think that paying $349,845, that JetBlue should pay this money. They should pay this because it only benefits them. I mean, is this. A city that just backs corporations or is this a. City that backs the residents and the people of Long Beach? And I know. That my. Home is affected by this, and many other people in my neighborhood are affected by this. So I would say that JetBlue should pay the money or we should that. That they're. The ones that benefit. So I wanted to thank you for allowing me to speak. Good evening. Thank you, sir. Next week, please. Good evening, Mayor and council members. You have not publicly discussed the Fresca study from 2013, which today is still relevant. I'm going to ask that you take that into serious consideration tonight. Now you're being asked to approve. The accurate number is $349,845 to provide you with additional information to make an intelligent decision on whether or not to approve the request for international flying. The only reason that this is back before you is because the cost has gone beyond the city manager's limits of $250,000. Each one of you have publicly stated that you support the coveted noise ordinance. You were simply asking for additional information to make a more educated decision. Yet this contract that you are asked to approve tonight includes the following services wording is directly from their websites. Jacob Engineering starting with aviation planning, site development and asset management to architecture and engineering design through to construction support, commissioning and long term facilities management. We are able to help our clients connect all of the critical, critical aspects of their facility to provide an excellent experience for their traveling customers. In the U.S., we have. Worked in more than 80 commercial airports, and in the past 15 years we have successfully delivered 12 major aviation programs totaling more than 15 billion. Lacoste Consulting, a boutique advocacy advisory shop offering strategic marketing network and capacity expertize for the aviation industry. This team is comprised of industry veterans from Large International as well as low cost characters. So the airlines are involved in this. Franka Fresca and Associates, a transportation and consulting firm, the firm that provided you the 2013 study that you have yet to discuss publicly. Fresca and Associates is dedicated to helping our airport clients establish best in class financial practices so that they can realize their goal of providing superior facilities and services to their customers. Somers, a top engineering firm that specializes in transportation segment Fonterra. They were involved in the 2001 airport expansion proposal. Applied Research Associates International Research and Engineering Company Lee Andrews Group, a full service public affairs and strategic planning firm that special specializes in public outreach and Jacobs and young construction cost consultants. Each one of these contractors has a history and vested interest in moving this project forward. This additional information study that you requested goes beyond the consideration to determine if this is a good, viable project that will benefit all of Olive Long Beach. We ask you once again tonight to consider all of the material you. Already have collected comments made by our. City prosecutor Doug Halbert, and the historical consequences related to the Long Beach challenges. Please receive and file this this request. Thank you very much. Speaker Please think this is our it looks like our final speaker on this item. Okay. Yes, sir. Yes. Hello, Robert. How you doing? City Council. My name is Steve Uptake. I'm a retired bisexual man living here in Long Beach. I've worked all my life. I do not have a criminal record. And I have requested over and over again that the city and the airport put in a noise monitor in the south by southwest part of the airport, which there is not a noise monitor. And you have a law or something about that. And you should put one there, because not only are you flying more of those little airplanes over my house and dropping fuel and oil on top of us that live there and the kids that live there, you're also flying big jets over my house that just started. I don't know. You didn't tell me about that one either. Now, let me change the subject. Okay. I'm actually going along with you here, guys. But you got to think big. You know what Hong Kong did? They got up off the coast over here like you did when you built the port. They built up an airport where you can have the biggest international airport you want. And that way it could be done where people aren't going to complain about it, like me. About airplanes falling out of. The sky on top of their heads or drop in oil or whatever the heck comes out of them. And then you could build yourself a big airport like Hong Kong. And I think some other country has built an airport off their coast also and have an international airport because there is a future if we don't blow ourselves up. And that way you could have your international airport. You know, you should think about things like that. And then you could have all that real estate over there to make another gazillion dollars on. I'm not against making money. It's about, you know, how you treat people. And the thing of it is, is that building up another airport off the coast is something you should consider. Yeah, it's going to take time and money, but that's that's life and, you know. So, in other words, I'm not against expansion, but trying to put an lax over in that hole where L.A., Long Beach is, it's, you know, lots of luck with that. You know, it's not a matter of if a plane is going to fall on Long Beach. It's a matter of when. And I sure as hell don't want to be under it. If you drop it in the ocean, that's a better chance of survival anyway. And so and that's my pitch, you know. In other words, put a noise monitor in the South by Southwest like you're supposed to so you can monitor the system and think about maybe putting that you could work with Orange County. They could probably between here in Long Beach, build up something off the coast, a real airport like Hong Kong, like it's already been done. It's not in science fiction, it's already been done. And that way you can have your international airport, you can make a gazillion dollars, have a future for the kids in the future and give these kids 15 bucks an hour. Okay. Thank you. So that closes public comment on I'm on another item. Councilman Mongo. I think studies are important. And I'm not saying that anyone here or at least I'm not committing to voting yes or no on the FISA. But I believe in what the very first woman said, which is a study is really important to know the viability. Airport Director Do you believe that this study has greater impact than to any one carrier? Would you elaborate on that? A Council on mango. We we do believe that in terms of the users of this facility, should it come to fruition at some point in the future, it would extend beyond a single carrier in JetBlue. It is true that JetBlue submitted a formal request to my attention at the end of February, which is what began this process that we are here to discuss this evening and consider. However, we do believe that there will be other beneficiaries at the airport in terms of others of of our tenant mix, including the general aviation community Gulfstream, which has a major completion center there on the West Coast operation for the completion of their aircraft. So we do believe that there will be other users beyond JetBlue for for that facility. I think it's interesting, you mentioned Gulfstream. They've increased employees by, I believe, 200 this year with all high paying jobs. Would you say that when this study comes back, should it not be beneficial to the city that this would potentially put the item of the international terminal as a know to rest forever? Or at least the imaginable long term future. Well, so I certainly wouldn't say forever, but. But what I would like to see is the results of the study. And and that, I think, will be very telling in terms of giving you the council the information that you need to make the informed decision as to whether to proceed with the project. There is nothing in this scope that will include design. They will look at potential sites for the fires to be located on. They would look at things in terms of potential scale, but there will be no design of a facility itself. We would come back to council with the full results of this study before any of those determinations would be made and those will be made by you. And Councilmember Austin did an excellent job about six months ago when we discussed this previously of ensuring the robust nature of the study. Have all items requested by Council Member Austin been included? Yes, they happen. Thank you. Councilman Price. Thank you. Well, when we voted on this before, my position was that data is good, it's always good. And I prefer to make decisions based on all of the data that we have, rather than speculation on many things that that come before us, especially things that happened in my district. So I don't see that this is going to be any different in terms of the process. Unlike one of the previous speakers, I had no illusion whatsoever that this study was going to cost five or $10,000. I mean, it costs more for us to study whether or not we should extend read curbing on a street by feet or two. So there was no to me, the cost of the study isn't shocking by any stretch of the imagination, given the scope of the study. So I'm not concerned about the financial commitment because I think much like many of the major studies that we do that impact policy decisions for the city. It's an important study and I want to make sure that it has a very broad scope so that everyone's interests are accounted for. So I'm going to be supporting this item. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Austin. Thank you. And I think my my position is pretty clear on this. It has been from the very beginning. I have some significant and serious reservations, and I voted against the study to begin with. I don't think I can be supportive of it again today. That said, I do have some some questions before I make my comments. And the first one is for the city attorney. Can you discuss how the components that are being conducted through your office, namely the risk assessment of the potential threats to noise ordinance and the plan to mitigate impact in neighborhoods in schools be conducted or incorporated into the feasibility study. How are you guys going to go about conducting this in-house? Do you plan on doing it with outside counsel? Councilman Austin Members of the City Council. Our current plan is. To. Review the draft of the report before it's made public. Work with the outside consultant if we need to do that to. Make a determination. As you know, our office is very. Familiar with the contents of the ordinance. We've been working with it even before it was adopted in. 1995, so we feel very comfortable with it. If we feel that we do need. Technical expertize from outside counsel, as one of the speakers indicated. We have used the law firm a great. Skill and balance in. The past for issues like this. They are also very familiar with the city of Long Beach Airport, the Long Beach Noise Compatibility Ordinance. And if necessary. We. Would probably hire them to provide additional assistance if we need it. But really, we're going to take a hard look at the report itself. Before we formulate an opinion. So I think Mr. Francis mentioned that the report will come back and he expected it back in July. That's correct. And so with the additions, I guess, do we plan on getting all this information back at once or will it come back? And based. On your previous. Direction, it's our understanding that we would present, in effect. A joint report. There would be a report by staff and the consultant, and our office would contribute to that by way of either a separate paper on the issue and. Of course oral presentation. As well. So we would do it at the same time. Okay. Thank you. That is helpful. Um, and Mr. Francis, in 2015, revenues at the airport were significantly down from the previous year, and I believe it was down more than $2 million from what was budgeted in that year. That is correct. Okay. And so the council's budget performance report last summer, the council was told that the airport fund revenues are directly impacted by the number of employments at the Lombard Airport. So that said, declining employment numbers over the past few years have been negatively impacted. And I think that was the negatively impacted revenues. I think that was one of your quotes. That's correct. I believe these revenue trends are continuing this year for the airport as well. Is that correct? Well, actually, our employment levels have stabilized, so but it doesn't really provide for recovery because we're not yet seeing an increase in passenger activity as we have in previous years. So so we will still see, we believe, revenues that are slightly off from what they were last year. There have been some adjustments in rates and charges for this year, and that certainly will compensate for for a good, good portion of what would have otherwise been declining revenues. So with the decline in revenues, do you. I think that $350,000 study is prudent. But the story. I believe that in terms of giving us the in-depth analysis from many angles that is warranted for a project of this magnitude, I do believe it's prudent. We have continued to report a surplus in terms of our overall budgeting. So we we still have an excess of revenues to expenses. But what we've been seeing is a decline in the overall revenue levels. So we still are reporting surpluses in our revenue stream. And I do believe that this will be a prudent project for us to move forward with in terms of the feasibility study itself. Okay. And so so I think we may just just disagree on that. I mean, I think, you know, when you lose your money. It's. Kind of difficult to to justify spending that type of money. But, um, I would prefer what similar sized cities have international airports. So just off the top of my head in California, Fresno is an airport in state that has an FAA. They have several flights to Mexico, various destinations in Mexico. Also Tucson, Arizona, Birmingham, Alabama. So just to name a few cities that are are about the same size of of Long Beach, but also have international facilities. And just this is just a question out of curiosity. I know it's a little off topic. I'm sorry, but do what type of commercial aircraft do they are able to use be use it at Long Beach Airport. Given our current current terminal constraints. So the the design aircraft, the largest aircraft that we would see on a routine basis would be of the 757 variety or Airbus 321, which is the roughly 180 to 200 passenger aircraft on. Under special circumstances, we could accommodate a very small widebody aircraft. But there really is no provision for that facility to handle large widebody aircraft, such as the Boeing 747 or Airbus three eighties, very large, you know, 4 to 500 passenger aircraft. Those cannot be be handled or accommodated at the existing facility. When I think international flight, I think big, big planes just that's just me. So I'll just have some quick remarks. As I said, when this issue came before the council last July, I strongly believe now and continue to believe that the quality of life of our residents is the paramount factor that should be determined as this council takes action. And I'm not prepared to expose our city or our neighborhoods to any significant risk when the economic reward to the city appears to be minimal or nonexistent. Opening the door to international flights creates a whole new potential risk, too, of a challenge to our very, very precious noise ordinance. And and as I read the newspaper, I look at cities across the the particularly in Burbank recently. They are trying to accomplish what we have in our noise ordinance and at least having a curfew. That's something that we also should be very mindful of. The former airport director memorial, Mel Rodriguez, in a memo in 2013 told the city council that future revenues from FISA would only serve to mitigate the cost of the facility and not further enhance the airport's financial position. And so, given the significant cost to even undertake this feasibility study when the airport is facing declining revenues, I believe is not financially responsible to continue down this path. The risk, I believe, outweigh the rewards. And I'll repeat that again. And so with that, I would like to make a substitute motion to receive and file this motion. Of. Thank you. Yeah. That would be me. Thank you, Councilmember Austin. And we have Councilmember Sue. I'm sorry, Councilmember Your Honor. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Just a few. Well, just one quick question. For me, it's very simple. Fresno, Birmingham and Tucson, you say, are international have international airports. Correct? Yes, sir, that's correct. How close in proximity are they to other airports that have a similar size or have or offer international flights? That's another state. Those three are probably about 100 miles away. I should have added that. Of course, Santa Ana Orange County Airport has the Federal Inspection Service facility as well. Okay. When it comes down to Long Beach. You know, I think that we're looking at. Adding international flights. We're talking about adding flights in proximity to Orange County, Los Angeles. Ontario, I think, has international flight, if I'm not mistaken. And yet, you know, here we are within, I would say, what, 50 miles of those cities, less with Orange County and L.A.. And yet we want to create a an international facility here. It just doesn't make sense to me. But also doesn't make sense is that when we're looking at the spending of $350,000, that can be used towards fixing sidewalks, cutting trees. Using staff for other purposes and security. We have a marijuana issue becoming a pretty soon. We're talking about how are we going to find that? Why? Here's $350. We could be use it for that. I mean, it doesn't make sense to me when we're looking at another study spending money in something that apparently is is is a a fait accompli based on how it's worded and what the expectations are going to be coming back to us. I said this many months ago when I offered. Let me rephrase it when I did not support this item back then, and I don't support it now. We don't need a feasibility study. We have a great airport. If any A-frame broke, don't fix it. If we need if revenue is an issue where we need to make more revenue, then let's talk about a business plan for what we have at the airport to increase revenue. You know, we're talking about the change of a business plan that goes from east to west or west to east , going north and south. But yet, when we talk about those, the business plan that goes east to west, west to east, we're cutting flights. We're not increasing flights. We're cutting flights. And that doesn't make any sense to me. In fact, I haven't seen any reports that would support cutting back flights. You know, I know that I can use more flights to D.C. directly from Long Beach being that, you know, I go there as is at least twice or three times a year sometimes. I know that we can use more flights to Sacramento, which would be fit in with a North-South flight plan. There's only one flight per day. And it's and it's in the middle of the morning. In the middle of the afternoon. Totally inconvenient. Thank you for for making meetings that I might have in Sacramento. So, I mean, it's instead of looking at creating an office, let's look at our airport in terms of creating more flight opportunities. So I'm not going to be supporting this issue, but I will support the receiver file. Thank you. Councilmember Superdome. Thank you. And Councilmember Mongeau referenced the first speaker, and that was Laura Selmer from the fourth District. What I'd like to do, I think you've answered this question, but I'd like to frame it the way Laura did, and that is why not adjust the scope of the study so it's less money. So if you could just address it in those terms, I appreciate it. Yes, sir. We worked very diligently with Jacobs to refine the scope to what you have before you today. As I mentioned, there are six areas, none of which are design. One is market analysis. The second is airport scoping and capability. The third is financial feasibility. The fourth is economic impact. The fifth is assessment of environmental impact, and last is security risk assessment. And as I mentioned, there is also the component that the city attorney's office will be covering. So this is to look at the feasibility, financial and otherwise of this type of project taking place at the airport. The previous study that was done in 2013 was only a financial feasibility study, just one of the six components that are going to be covered by Jacobs with this study. So this is certainly more robust, but it takes a more full look at what the project would look like. All of the components that need to be considered that the council would would, I believe, benefit from having the information to make that future decision. So again, the scope has been refined to the point that it is in today. And we believe that what we brought forward is fitting for the type of project that is before you. Okay. Thank you. And I'm going to confuse two issues here purposely, because I get asked this question almost daily. There is something different on the table than we had last July, and that is the additional flight slots. So if you would just indulge, just please. Approximately how many flights do we have on a daily basis right now? So today, with the 41 air carrier slots and 25 commuter slots, we have roughly 40 departures per day. Presently of of 66 possible today. Okay. So 40 of 66. So if you filled all those slots and added nine plus, what would your total number be? 75. Okay. So that's that's the threat today that that it wasn't in July when this first came before us. It's affirmative. So so there are there separate completely separate items. The one is due to the noise ordinance and the noise analysis that is conducted annually. That is what has resulted in the airport actually having room available in the air carrier budget for the last four years, which is what caused us to take the action that we presented to you in the study session on December 8th to increase the air carrier slots from 41 to 50. The in terms of the the slots, the 41 and 25 slots, the 25 commuter slots, quite frankly, there's not much demand for them. As of today, only three of those 25 slots are allocated. And it really is just a function of the way that airlines operate today and the limitations that are placed on aircraft in that category by weight. So there's just not very much demand for those 25 slots in the present industry the way that airlines operate today. I don't really foresee that we will have many of those slots all of a sudden have interest from carriers for allocation. So really, it's the air carrier category that we're concerned with. The 41 is growing to 50 through the process that we presented last month. Right. And thank you for that clarification. And I understand it. But my constituents impacted by the airport see it as a real threat. They see more flight slots and changing the business model of the airport and that all those slots could potentially be filled. So that that's I just wanted to get that on the record. That's what I'm hearing from my constituents. I'd like to thank my colleagues. Mr. Austin, thank you for asking all the questions that I had on my mind. He obviously knows this topic very well, and I appreciate it. Just one point of clarification for Roberta. Your comment on the money being used for other purposes, those moneys have to stay at the airport. We all understand that. But a waste of money is a waste of money, if that's what the speakers were saying here tonight. So they did it eloquently. I won't add to that. So I'd like to thank my colleagues for their words. I would like to thank the speakers for being here tonight. And I don't want to say I won't be supporting this because there's a substitute motion on the table here. So we'll wait to see what happens. Thank you. Mr. Mayor. Council members, I. Do want to echo what Councilmember Supernova said earlier. We talked about the dollars. Potentially could go. To police, fire streets, Rosa. That's absolutely not the case. These are enterprise fund dollars that can only be spent on airport related issues. And I appreciate that. Councilmembers who were not. Kotsenburg give anything awesome. Look, vice me with them. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I wanted to thank Councilmember Supernova for clarifying how enterprise funds can be spent. So thank you for doing that. And I agree with you. While it is not allowed to spend any enterprise funds on general fund activities, if it were a waste of money, it's something that we should not support. I have always supported. Our ability to have access to knowledge and information and data. And I continue to support that. And I believe this is something that we must do and that we should do. I don't believe it's a fait accompli and not for me personally. And I don't come to this conversation with that in mind. And I appreciate the staff recommending the direction of the study and appreciate Councilmember Price's reminder that a simple study just in our neighborhoods costs tens of thousands of dollars. And so I had no expectations of this to cost anything less than what it does. And I'll be supporting that. And I ask my colleagues to vote no on the substitute motion. Thank you. Councilman Richardson. I want to thank staff and particularly I want to thank my colleague to the right, councilman austin. He's done a he and Councilmember U ranga and councilmember super nice have done a really good job at keeping this issue alive. I believe in a process. I believe that I'll make a decision ultimately in the end. But in all those scenarios, I need facts and I need data. So the truth is, I don't want to pick and choose my methodology on how I make decisions, make certain decisions without actually allowing the process to evolve. Hearing out here and everyone to make their case. So this is no different. I'm going to support the the main motion and I'll make an ultimate decision once I see the facts in front of me. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. There is a substitute motion on the floor, which is a received file by Councilman Austin. And then depending on that, will go to the next motion, which was the original motion by Councilman Mongo, depending on the vote of the substitute. So all those in favor of the substitute motion, please cast your votes. Motion fails. Okay, now we have the main motion, which is to approve the recommendation to move forward as made by Councilman Mongo and Councilwoman Price. Members, please go and cast your vote. Motion carries. Okay. Thank you. I know there might be a few folks outside that are trying to get in, so I'm going to take just a one minute to minute recess. So folks that need to go can go. And if there are folks that are trying to come in, the next item up is the minimum wage item. And so if there are folks in need to come in, let them try to find some seats. So just take a one or two minute recess and let the adjustment happen and let staff prepare for the presentation. So thank you. Okay. We're going to I'm going to call a meeting back to order here so I can just have everyone. Please take a seat. I'm going to go and call this meeting back to back to order. So if I can get Madam Clerk to do the roll call, and if I can, everyone else, please grab a seat.

A bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification for 2600 S. University Blvd. (NEIGHBORHOODS AND PLANNING) Rezones 2600 South University Boulevard from OS-A (Open Space-3,000 square feet) to G-MU-5 (General Urban, Mixed Use, 5 stories) in Council District 6. A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD AT LEAST FOUR WEEKS AFTER PUBLICATION. The Committee approved filing this bill at its meeting on 1-7-15.

DenverCityCouncil_02092015_15-0006

Thank you, Councilman Shepard, who's been moved and second accountable six approves the zoning map amendment. The Council is required by law to conduct hearings on zoning map. Amendments in the Council's actions are subject to court review in order to provide a record for court review. Testimony is recorded and any items presented to the Council are marked as exhibits and become a part of the record. And Speaker should begin the remarks by telling the council the names and sizes of residents and then they feel comfortable doing so. Their home addresses. A public hearing for council Bill six is now open. May we have the staff report? Thank you, Mr. President. Good evening. Members of Council. My name is Steven Chester, senior city planner with Community Planning and Development. Here's Brant present the staff report for 2600 South Emergency Boulevard map a rezoning map amendment from OCA to GMU five subject site is located within Southeast Denver in Council District six within the University Park neighborhood. The subject site is located at the intersection of University Boulevard Investor Avenue, directly adjacent to Harvard Gulch. Now, rather than kind of hiding the the the punch line to this free zone, I'm just going to kind of outline some of the unique history with this case. Prior to 2010, the subject site was zoned r two. It's due to the fact that we did not have a zone district for our open space. In the old code. It's been used as surface parking for the neighboring multifamily project since around the 1960s. The city sold the land to the current land owner back in 2005. During the citywide rezoning in 2010, it was incorrectly rezone to OSA, which is the zone district for city owned and maintained open space due to a mistake of fact. Pretty much in 2010, the data that CPD used during the citywide rezoning was incorrectly identified. This land is still owned and maintained by the city, thus the need for this rezoning. So more details about the site. It's about 4000 square feet. It's currently vacant use as surface parking. As mentioned before, the property owners are requesting rezoning to bring the parcel into conformance with the adjacent parcel. The city is then take it upon ourselves to be the applicant for this rezoning in order to correct the mistake that was caused in 2010. Thus, the manager of CPD is the applicant for this rezoning. The requested zone district is the general urban neighborhood context the mixed use five story max Jamie five quickly walk through the existing context of the site, starting with the zoning along University Boulevard, primarily the general urban and neighborhood context series of heights from 12 to 5 and three. The surrounding single family zone districts are all ESU X in terms of the surrounding land use along your see below for some high higher density multifamily development. It's high in mid-rise buildings and primarily single family stable residential neighborhoods surrounding the site along with you see here the directly adjacent Harvard Gulch. In terms of the building form and scale, you can see directly to the north that first picture is a 12 storey multifamily building. The second picture is the site directly north of the subject site, which is the one story multifamily project. The third picture is the current condition of the site, and the last picture is the directly adjacent Harvard Gulch. The process to date we received a 9 to 0 recommendation from planning board had a discussion. Neighborhoods and planning committee in here are today at a hearing at City Council. Public outreach has been conducted throughout the process as outlined in the Denver Zoning Code with public notification given of tonight's public hearing. I also received a note from the City Park Community Council. They voted 11 no in favor of this rezoning application. Quickly walk through the review criteria for all of our official MAP amendments, starting with consistency with adopted plans. The adopted plans for this site are the Comprehensive Plan Blueprint. Denver and the Mercy University Park Plan, adopted in 2008 compliant 2000, outlines a number of strategies which support this rezoning application, primarily around the idea of promoting infill development where appropriate, in order for neighbors to live, work and play within their own neighborhoods. In addition to land use strategies which talk about creating a. High quality urban design along our mixed use corridors and lane user objective to clarify and update Denver's zoning ordinance and related ordinances, regulations and procedures to be consistent with the goals and objectives of Denver's citywide land use and transportation plan. Moving on to that plan, blueprint Denver at the time. Blueprint Denver was was created. This was still owned and maintained by the city of Denver. So the future land use classification is open space. However, the surrounding context is all single family residential, in which single family homes is the predominant housing type. However, that does not preclude higher density housing from being present in these areas, especially along mixed use and residential arterial streets in which University Boulevard is designated. It is also an area of stability. Areas of stability are used to maintain the existing character of neighborhoods. However, that does not preclude new development and redevelopment in order to prevent stagnation. As I mentioned before, University Boulevard is a residential arterial street. Vesper Avenue is an undesignated local street. Moving on to the University Park plan, there's a number of goals and strategies in this plan which support this rezoning. Specifically within the Urban Design and Land Use Goals section in which the plan identifies this area as a main street urban design district. And in that classification, the typical skills 2 to 5 storeys, up to 8 to 10 storeys in transit, transit rich activity centers and nodes. This is in order to create a healthy neighborhood or healthy neighborhood edges and encouraging dense, compact transit, supportive growth where appropriate. Somebody finds that there is this reasoning is consistent with the camp plan 2000 blueprint Denver and University Park Neighborhood Plan. In addition, the uniformity of district regulations in furthering the health, public, public health, safety and welfare are met due to the implementation of the city's adopted city plans. The justifying circumstances for this rezoning is a mistake of fact. As mentioned before, CBT finds this criterion is met due to the data used during the 2010 citywide rezoning incorrectly identified this parcel as city owned and maintained open space. Lastly, consistency with neighborhood context zoned district purpose and intent. The general urban context is primarily characterized by multi-unit residential uses and a variety of building forms. The proposed rezoning to Jimmy five brings the incorrectly zoned parcel and to closer alignment with the surrounding neighborhood context. CPD finds this criterion is met based on the plan recommendations for this area along with the existing and desired character of this neighborhood. With that, CPD recommends approval based on finding all review criteria have been met. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chester. We have one speaker this evening, Mr. Texter. Fat tax of 45.35 Julian Street, Denver, Colorado. Members of Council. It was simply wrong for you to give yourselves a pay raise while the camping ban is still in effect and you have not provided for the home as a tax. Denver Mr. Texar, please stay on the topic of the public hearing, please. You made a factual error just as you did in this rezoning ordinance. And worse, you don't have enough respect for the people to submit it to a vote of the people. Thank you, Mr. Texar. So that concludes our speakers. Are there any questions from members of Council? Kathleen Robb Thank you, Mr. President. Well, this is pretty much technical rezoning. I am concerned that we have a blueprint map that shows this is open space from 2000 to 2003. So I worry about the consistency with the cities. Adopt a plan and I return to the question that I ask in committee. Why did Parks sell this? I understand it's been used for parking for a long time, which was on the first slide. But I'm wondering if it's a case of real estate not understanding that the land use concept was park. I want to know if Parks and Rec were advised of the sale and approved of it, and I haven't had a real answer since committee though I have to admit I didn't spend a lot of time following up until a constituent brought it to my attention this afternoon. Excellent question. In terms of Blueprint Denver, we'll be updating that in the near future. So hopefully we'll fix any of these inconsistencies in terms of the kind of reasoning for the sale back in 2005. Greg needs to go from Parks and Rec is here. Maybe you can provide a little more insight into that sale back in 2005 and kind of my search haven't been able to find any sort of official documentation with any sort of reasoning for the for the sale. But okay. I do really appreciate your being here from Parks and Rec. I'm sorry if I mispronouncing last name. Good evening. Greg Nowinski. I'm the park surveyor for the parks, familiar with property records and these types of issues. This was a real estate deal. Parks was not involved in this decision to sell this part of property. Originally, it was acquired as part of the Harvard Gulch drainage area. And as time goes on, these areas were incorporated in the parks maintenance category. So far is being consulted on the sale of it. Parks was not consulted with with this as far as I'm aware. So being city property, this was used as a parking lot by the adjoining property owners real estate saw fit to confirm that use and sell this property to the adjoining property owner. So it's not designated park property. It wasn't acquired to be park property, but it was in parks inventory as part of the Harvard Gulch drainage area. Do you have any idea if Parks and Rec was involved in that Blueprint Denver map that shows it as open space and identifies it? Our minutes from committee says Prior to 2002, the property was owned by the city and parks and the Parks and Rec land use concept was noted as natural open space. It would have been in parks inventory and noted as green or as park. Okay. Thank you. Sure. Thank you. Councilman Rob Carter. I'm going to take it. First, I want to thank Councilwoman Robb for that question, because that then makes me wonder how many other parcels do we have that are next to parks that might be might have been sold off? Or and I know that there's been a great effort in the city to try to wrap our arms around all of the park land and dedicate officially dedicate it so that it is protected land. So thank you for asking that question. My question is a little different, and it's about the choice of zoning that this is being changed to. And so I'd like to ask if you wouldn't mind coming back up and help us determine how that was decided? Because I had heard you say that originally it was our to land and this is GMU five and there is a difference in density between the GMU five and the older are two zoning. So how was that decided? And is there any I'd have to look back at the map to see if there is any other Jimmu five zoning adjacent to this property. So great question. So the Jimmy five was decided because is the the zoning of the parcel directly adjacent to the site along with the plan recommendation from the University Park Neighborhood Plan in terms of identifying. Pull that up on the map. Sure. Well, we're talking. Um. Yeah, that's probably the best one. So. University Boulevard. It's identified the plan as a in blueprint Denver and in the neighborhood plan as a residential arterial street. And so there's a primarily the general urban context is found at a variety of different densities you see some give you three directly north of the site is Jim U 12. And so Jim, you five is the site that's directly adjacent to this parcel. And it was CPI's recommendation that this parcel also be reason to give me five. So when you say adjacent it's actually across the street and beyond an additional property to the is that the north and. The the Jimmy five is directly kind of touching this parcel. Right. And the 12 is across the street. Yes. That's correct. Okay. Yeah, I was just trying to understand that because it didn't seem to make sense that this was next to open space, but yet we were going from an AR two zone to a GM U five. And so the property to I'm not sure is that the east on the right side of the property? Mm hmm. What is the zoning on that? So that would be across the alley between this property and property. Directly to the east is ESU d x. So a single use zoning district, single unit. Excuse me. So that's more in contrast to the old r-1 zoning, is that correct? Typically. But there's some differences. Okay. All right. Those are all the questions I have for right now. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember. Take it. Councilman Robbie, another question. I do. And thank you for your indulgence on this relatively straightforward rezoning. My question is, I see the bread Buchanan or CPD as the applicant on this, which indicates a technical error that you've found. But do you have any idea how the land will be used in the future? Is the current owner the same person who owns the adjoining GM? U5 Because I know it's addressed for university, it's not really right on university. So the parcel directly to the north is owned, is also owned by this this land owner of this subject site. And is this property necessary for him to to meet his parking requirements? Correct. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman. Rob, any other questions? What was seen on public hearing is now closed. Time for comment, Councilman Brown. Thank you, Mr. President. There are some things I wish that could be done administratively. Unfortunately, this could not be a yes vote will correct a mistake of fact. Surely we all want to correct a mistake of fact. So let's vote yes. Thank you, Mr. Brown. Thank you, Counsel Brown. Any other comments? Councilwoman Robb. I will be supporting this tonight, but I do want to express my concern about the disconnect which was previous, not current, between real estate and parks, because I think people have become aware of those differences. But this has caused some problems in the past. Parks is very dedicated right now to designating as many parks and making sure there Servais is correct. But my if I voted against this, it wouldn't change the past. And right now it's being used this way. And there certainly is a use by right, I believe there on the property. So I will support this. Thank you, Councilwoman Robb. Councilwoman Ortega. I just want to explain my vote as well. I think the last question that Councilwoman Robb asked about whether this particular property is needed by the adjacent property owner. I think by changing the zoning to a higher density, it affords the opportunity at some point in the future. If that owner wanted to change the what's on the site, they would be able to do something that is much bulkier if they level the building that they have now. But I think in general, the fact that it is being it is needed and is being used and will continue to be used by the adjacent property owner that I'm okay allowing that to move forward with the zone change. I would like at some point to see that whenever there is park land that is not dedicated, that is being proposed to be sold, that we are at a minimum informed about it, but should be allowed to vote on it as well. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Ortega. Any other comments on Council Bill six? CNN on. Madam Secretary, roll call. Brown. Hi, Fats. I can eat Lemon Lopez. Hi, Monteiro. Nevitt. Ortega. Rob. Rob, I. Shepherd Sussman. Hi, Brooks. Hi, Mr. President. I am secretary. Please close the belly, announce the results. 3939 As Council Bill six has passed due to the President Day Holiday Council will meet next on Tuesday, February the 17th. Seeing no other business before this body, this meeting is adjourned. Denver eight TV. Your city. Your source. Denver. Eight on TV and online. Stay connected to your community, your city, your source.

A bill for an ordinance amending Article XI (Refund Payments to Elderly or Disabled Persons) of Chapter 53 of the Denver Revised Municipal Code (Taxation and Miscellaneous Revenue). Amends Article XI of Chapter 53 of the Denver Revised Municipal Code (DRMC) relating to the Refund Payments to Elderly or Disabled Persons program to expand eligibility including to low-income homeowning families with children, citywide. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 12-19-18.

DenverCityCouncil_01022019_18-1507

Thank you, Councilwoman Sussman. If there are no objections from members of Council on Monday, January 7th, there will be a one hour courtesy public hearing on second or final reading for Council Bill 1476. All right, Madam Secretary, please put the next item on our screens. Councilwoman, can each go ahead with your comment? Thank you, Mr. President. This is a really exciting bill 1507 And it's about a program that often isn't known by our residents, and it's really something for them. So that's why I called this out. This is first reading on the senior and disabled property tax rebate that used to just be for low income seniors and disabled folks . It was progressive and that included both renters and owners. But we actually didn't see very many owners who were able to take advantage of the program. We have about 3 to 4000 households each year, though, that apply to the city and get assistance. And so this bill tonight really is going to help us reach more owners who are struggling to stay in their homes as our property taxes go up with the values of our homes to support both our schools and the city. So the program itself doubled in 2012, but owners were unable to use it. And today's changes are going to increase the limits for owners. For example, for a single senior to be that you needed to earn less than 16,000 for a single senior or disabled person. Going forward, you can earn up to 20,500. So a pretty significant increase in eligibility for owners who are seniors or disabled folks. And then I think one of the most important changes is that it will now start to cover families with children. We have, you know, a couple thousand of these owners in the city who are lower income. Maybe they bought a home and then experienced a disability or a divorce. Maybe they inherited a home from parents. But for whatever reason, they own a home but have a very low income. And these families with children, they will be able to earn up to $27,000 for a family of two, for example, or 33,000 ish for a family of four. So we're going to really be able to help more single senior and disabled low income homeowners. And we're going to be able to, for the first time help families. So lots of kudos and we can share more of those on final reading. But just to help ask folks to help us get the word out, these programs are available starting May 1st for the prior tax year. And so all of the department's materials will be upgraded and reformed in the next couple of months. And so it's a super exciting set of changes and we'd appreciate the public's help and to spread the word. And thank you to everyone who worked on the bill. Thanks. Thank you, Councilwoman Kenney. Councilwoman Gilmore. Thank you, President Clerk. I am happy to support this on first reading tonight and you know, thank my colleagues, Councilwoman Kenney each and Councilman Espinosa for pulling together the Office of Economic Development, the Office of Finance, Denver Human Services. And, you know, this really came forward because residents in the Montebello community, the community that I live in, were very concerned about anti displacement tools that we could start to look at to make sure that we are allowing our seniors to age in place and others to stay within our community. And this was a low threshold where we as the city already had the senior and disabled property tax rebate program, and we would be able to expand this and get it out further and wider to our residents. And so I just want to give kudos and a thanks to the Montebello leadership cabinet because we've been working together with them for over three years, identifying different policies and initiatives that we could work on together as a community to mitigate involuntary displacement and the negative effects of gentrification in our community. And this is going to be a huge win for them as well, because they put a lot of time and effort and work into making sure we were able to push this forward. So thank you. Thank you, President Clark. Thank you, Councilwoman Gilmore. Madam Secretary, would you please put the next item on our screens? And, Councilwoman, can you just go ahead with your comment?

A bill for an ordinance authorizing a transfer of cash from the Excise Tax Base Account for an increase in appropriation to the 2017 General Fund Contingency and subsequent supplemental appropriations to the Affordable Housing Property Tax Revenue Fund and the City Attorney. Appropriates $9,451,397 to the 2017 General Fund Contingency due to excess revenue derived from the recent settlement surrounding hotel lodgers tax revenue; appropriates $4,058,171 to the Affordable Housing Property Tax Revenue Fund; and appropriates $5,393,226 to the City Attorney’s Office for legal fees associated with the settlement. The Committee approved filing this bill by consent on 11-21-17.

DenverCityCouncil_12112017_17-1319

All right. Thank you, Councilman Nu, if there are no objections for members of council. We'll go ahead with this one hour public hearing on Monday, December 18th. This is for Council Bill 1324 regarding minority and women business enterprises and small business enterprise legislation. So that is done. Thank you, Councilman. New Madam Secretary, can you please put up 1319 and Councilwoman Black, will you please put 1319 on the floor? I move that council bill 1319 be placed upon final consideration and do pass. All right. It has been moved and seconded comments by members of council council and can each. Thank you, Mr. President. Council Bill 1319 is a bill that accepts funds from the Lodgers Tax and allocates a portion to the housing fund. It takes the right source and it dedicates a portion of it to the right overall use, which is affordable housing. The majority of these funds backfill linkage fee dollars, and the majority are going to expenditures that were already planned. However, a portion of these funds are not yet for planned or allocated uses over the course of the past several months. I have done my best to ask very specific questions about some of the ways that we are doing on allocated housing, funding, decisions and processes. And I have been unable to get answers to some of those questions in order to be consistent with the votes of conscience. I have taken the past several times. These things have come before me because these things are still unanswered. I can't vote for these funds tonight. I expect that the bill will probably pass anyway and I highly respect my colleagues. I don't take issue with your decision, but for me, when questions go unanswered, I can't then vote for the bill to move forward. So with that, I'll be voting no tonight. Thank you, Mr. President. All right. Thank you. Councilwoman, can each councilman take. Thank you, Mr. President. As you all know, we are waiting for a housing plan to come before us. And that plan is supposed to be a guide for how we spend our housing funds in this city. Not just the $15 million fund that was created a year and a half ago, but all of our housing funds. And I attended a housing advisory committee meeting last week where there was discussion about various aspects of the plan. And I became very concerned about the appearance that we are making decisions before the Housing Advisory Committee has even had an opportunity to adopt the plan to ensure that their voice, their input is very much a part of what that plan needs to contain to ensure that we are targeting those dollars where our greatest need exists. And you all probably read the article about a an expectation that there would be city dollars allocated to a community land trust. I commend our foundation community for wanting to do that and for stepping up to the plate. We have a community, the Globeville, Luria, Swansea community that's been working on a community land trust. And this presentation last week sort of presumed that the community efforts would be negated by a citywide effort. And in my experience, you know, over the last 30 plus years, I've been on council and have seen development opportunities happen, not just here in our city, but in other cities across the country. It's when you have community buy in and you've got a bottom up, as well as a top down commitment to funding to make things happen. And in this case, it didn't appear as though there was any commitment whatsoever to the community component of this land trust. And so I am sharing some of the same concerns that Councilwoman Kenney is sharing. She and I have been tracking and following what's happening with our housing programs. And I know when I had asked some questions early on about the $15 million that we had for 2017 and learned that it had all been allocated to various projects. Decisions are being made and, you know, the need exists. I don't question that we shouldn't be looking at where those needs are, but I don't know that any of that is taking into account the recommendations that are coming out of the draft plan for the housing fund, for the housing plan that ensures that we're prioritizing where those dollars need to be spent the greatest. So I'm not sure if I'm going to vote for this bill tonight, but I am expressing my concerns about how decisions are being made before we have clear guidance on where we're prioritizing those dollars. So I think it's critically important that we follow the lead of. For roots in our community. You have been doing housing in this city for years and years that have been sitting on this housing advisory committee and giving guidance and recommendation to the city. And so I'm just sharing the same frustration and concerns. Thank you. Yeah, thank you. Councilman Ortega. Councilman Espinosa. Yeah. Thank you, Councilwoman Kennedy, for calling this out for a separate vote, sort of people who can see the the why do you see me scrambling here and highlighting things? This was the bill that sort of got me going, not sitting in. Think of any more. I don't scrutinize these things in real time the way I was accustomed to. And so this one called out I mean, raised some alarm bells for me. So I'm glad you guys bought Councilwoman Commission. Ortega put some additional light on it. Because of that, I will be abstaining from this vote because I'm not comfortable on either side. It's not lost on me that on night where we're going to be approving, and rightly so, 1349, which puts $2.6 million into building 180 affordable units out in Stapleton, this is $4 million without without that specificity and specificity specifically to, you know, with no specificity in the plans to address some glaring affordable housing and gentrification pressures that we are putting by pumping hundreds of millions of dollars into Globeville or Swansea. I have been consistent in my message to the administration, to Eric at the the Director of Office of Hope that without specificity for that community, where we are making this much investment in everything but the people that are there and have to endure the pressures that come with this level of investment would be a failure of that plan. So with that, I won't vote no, but I will be abstaining from this vote. Thank you. All right. Thank you. As well as Councilman Flynn. Thank you, Mr. President. I have a great deal of sympathy with the arguments that council members can each and Ortega put forward, but I would still urge my colleagues to approve this appropriation. It is the money. The funds are unexpected funds that came from a settlement with the online booking agencies that were not collecting the full lodgers taxes on the on their on their online bookings. And so we have this sudden influx of money. And what this ordinance does essentially is it appropriates it into the housing fund and it doesn't speak to how eventually it might be spent. But I think it's still prudent to park the money there for the time being. My heart is with is with the arguments that the two council members on my on either side made. But I would still ask us to approve the appropriation pending other decisions as to how it's spent. Thank you. Councilman Espinosa Yeah, I just want to say I agree wholeheartedly with that investment in affordable housing and putting that money towards this. But just because this money would go to the you know, otherwise, my understanding is this would go to the general fund, which we can appropriate at a later date. You know, once we have that plan in place with the specificity and actions that the community has been calling out for, this is sort of a just a a straightforward push back as far as I'm concerned with the the the the lack of specificity and solutions. And for me, in in the in the plan thus far. So with that, I think at some point, just like we can say no to correct errors, I think we need to learn to say no to specific requests without clear direction on how that's going to be utilized things. Okay. Thanks. You know, I'll be supporting this. You know, obviously we're no longer in an affordable housing need. We're in a desperate crisis, and we need to get funds any way that we can. However, Councilwoman Kenny Rogers has brought up some points, obviously, that need to be addressed. And I would just look to the administration to hear the concerns that are going on in city council to begin to meet with some of these council members to help us figure out how we can agree on some of the specificity needs to be happening around the use of these funds or else every bill that comes before us, this is what's going to happen. So I'll be supporting this, Madam Secretary. It's been moved. The second roll call can each. Lopez I. Knew. ORTEGA No. Sussman I black. Eye. Clark All right, Espinosa. Flynn. I. Gilmore i Herndon. I Cashman. Reluctantly, I Mr. President. I closed voting results tonight. Two nays. One abstention. Tonight, as soon as one abstention, 319 passes. All right. I believe these are all the items that need to be called out. All of the bills for introduction to Order publish. We're not ready for the block votes. A resolution that bills for final consideration. Council members remember that this is a consent or block vote and you will need to vote. Otherwise, this is your last chance to call on an item. On a separate vote, though, tonight, Councilwoman Black is making the motions. I'm going to ask Haslam and Gilmore to offer the block vote so that computer technology experts can continue to access the computer issues she is experiencing. Is that all right, Councilwoman Gilmore? Yes. President Brooks. Okay. And Councilman, we did just please put the resolution for adoption in the bills for final consideration, for final passage on the floor. Well, do I move that resolutions be adopted in bills and final consideration be placed upon final consideration and do pass in a block for the following items. 1355 1327 1336 1137 1329 1337 1338 1342 1354, 1184, 1278, 1330 1331, 1332, 1343, 1344, 1345, 1346, 1347, 1349, 1422, 1353, 1296, 1297, 1301, 13, 15, 13, 16, 13, 17 1318 1309, 13, ten, 13, 11, 13, 12. 1196 1211 1264. All right. I think she got it. Madam Secretary, do you concur? Yes. All right. It's been moved and seconded. Madam Secretary. Roco. Black eye. Clark Espinosa, Flynn, I. Gilmore, I. Herndon, I. Cashman can eat Lopez. All right, new Ortega I. Assessment I. Mr. President. I. Please salsa following announced results. 13 Eyes. 13 Eyes. The resolutions have been adopted and the bills have in place a full and final consideration and do pass. Tonight, there will be a required public hearing when Council Bill 1076 Changes on reclassification classification of 1400 1404 1408 West 37th Avenue and Highlands and require a public hearing on Constable 1143.

A bill for an ordinance amending the short-term rentals chapter of the Denver Revised Municipal Code to provide a definition for booking service providers, clarify duties of Excise and Licenses hearing officers, and authorize subpoena power for the Director of Excise and Licenses. Amends the short-term rentals chapter of the Denver Revised Municipal Code to provide a definition for booking service providers, clarify duties of Excise and Licenses hearing officers, and authorize subpoena power for the Director of Excise and Licenses. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 11-4-20.

DenverCityCouncil_11162020_20-1229

May 12 EIS Council Resolution 1 to 3 four has been adopted. The next item up is Council Bill 1229. Council Member Hines, please go ahead with your questions on Bill 1229. Thank you, Madam President. Is there someone available from. Access and license, perhaps. I come from a councilman? Mm hmm. Well, here. Hi, everybody. So I. So I want to thank education license for the conversation we had before the committee meeting. Was it last week or the week before? Time flies. 2020 feels like it's a million years. But the conversation that we had about short term rentals and about the strike, the short term rental advisory committee, I won't go back over those comments. I also would encourage people to view the committee meeting that where we discussed this bill. I won't go back over that either. I just I do have just a couple of questions about our current short term rental ordinances due to our current short term rental ordinances. Provide any protections for our LGBT community. I believe that would be a legal question. We should. Elders Reggie. Bullock. I Council on Hines. Thank you for that question. So in our in our current short term rental ordinance, we don't have any any regulations that would deal with that there. Now, that's not to say that there might not be ordinance provisions that are elsewhere in our code that would provide protections for LGBT x rays, others suspect classes of suspect classes. So we could do some more research and provide you with a better answer for that. But that's not what this that wouldn't be in this and organization for looking at the things they. I missed a little bit of the last bit, but I think you were talking about protected classes, including religion, sex, national origin, sexual orientation, gender identity, race or color, which are I think all the class is protected under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. You. You're saying that our current short term rental ordinances is silent on any of the nationally protected classes? So I'm saying that in Chapter 33, the ordinances that that actually regulate short term rentals, we don't have any that's not in that ordinance provision in those ordinance provisions. That's not to say that we might not have ordinances, other ordinances, specifically with the city's discrimination ordinances, that would protect for those that would provide protections for those classes . We would have to do more research to determine whether or not those provisions are applicable to short term rentals. Okay. I wouldn't be able to provide a thorough answer on that question at this moment. Fair enough. I'm putting you on the spot. Appears Ms.. Stewart also has her henry's. So I don't know if you wanted to add add color for the mayor's office. Sure. Thank you, Councilman Hines. Sky Stuart. Mayor's office. Reggie is. Correct. Our city's anti-discrimination ordinance covers. All of those protected classes that you named. And short term rentals are considered a place of public accommodation in that ordinance, so they are covered by that ordinance. Short term rentals are considered a place of public accommodation. I want to make sure they're right. Yes. Correct. As the ordinance lays out various places of public accommodation where the anti-discrimination ordinance applies. Short term rentals are considered in the same way as hotels and other. Places like that. And we can have the city. Attorney who worked on the the updated draft last contact to you and walk you through that. That would be interesting. Yeah, I think that in addition to the, you know, the folks in all the protected classes in the Civil Rights Act of 1964, obviously did the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act. That also provides particular guidelines for places of public accommodations. So I'd be curious to see how those rules apply to someone's home effectively. So, you know, as they're renting out there a portion of their home or something near you next to their home. So thank you for that. That's. That's all I have. Thank you, Madam President. All right. Thank you, Councilman Hines. Councilman Sawyer. Thanks, Madam President. Hey, everyone. I know you guys. I emailed you this week, and we got a question into our office about some of the language around this in the way it was written just around the hearings. And I so I responded this weekend. And, and I am assuming that this is probably just a drafting thing from the city attorney's office, but wanted to run it by you since I had you in front of me real quickly. And if it's if you haven't had time to look into it, no worries. But since I've got you here, I thought I would just ask. So the question was essentially some of the wording around the hearings process, if there is a complaint, is a little bit seems a little bit strict. And so is that reflective of sort of standard language in the code or is that something that's specific to this language in particular? So I can I can take that question. Councilwoman Silver. So, yes, this is reflective of language and other instances that we have in the code. We specifically borrow this language from similar language that we have in the charter as it relates to the hiring of hearing officers for liquor license hearings. It's similar to language that we have in Chapter 24 of the code as it relates to the Department of Public Health and Environment's use of hearing officers for marijuana hearings. It's also very substantially similar to what the state uses for state level hearing officers. And it goes back to the fact that we want to reflect the really get back to the really relay, that these are quasi judicial hearings in nature and that we have to develop a record just in case anyone wants to appeal this this the determination that's made first by a hearing officer to the directors. The director can make a determination and have all the evidence before her and then make a determination. That is the final decision that can then be appealed to district court and then the district court can review, can have all the information, all the records available to them to make a determination as to whether or not that decision was lawful. So, yes, we've probably borrowed language from other provisions in the code. And then the other piece of that was the subpoena information. And we essentially updated that language. It's substantially the same. We just changed a few of the terms just because it's very legalese. And a lot of these provisions were written 50 years ago, so we thought we could be a little bit shorter. But those provisions are substantially the same as what we have for administrative citations that they give hearing officers. I mean, in this case, the director, the ability to issue subpoenas, to compel the presentation of documents or witnesses. And if they don't, if a person is unable to submit those documents or if they don't comply with the subpoena, that would be unlawful. And that's the same thing as as any administrative citation and subpoena that we issued for an administrative citation hearing. Awesome. I really appreciate it. I assumed and I said in my email response that I assumed that you it was just a drafting thing and that you were taking it from, you know, or reflecting other areas of the law or other areas of our code. But I just wanted to confirm that with you. So thank you so much for that explanation that was really thorough, and I really appreciate that. Thank you. Thanks, Madam President. Thank you, Councilwoman Zoya and Reggie and Molly and Skye. The next item up is Council Bill 1216. Councilmember Cashman, will you please put Bill 1216 on the floor for publication?

Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to enter into an agreement with the California State University, Long Beach Foundation, to provide continuing education workforce development classes in Downtown Long Beach, in an amount not to exceed $1,000,000, for a period of ten years. (District 1)

LongBeachCC_03192019_19-0263

. And so I want to I know that President Connolly is already past her time, that she's supposed to be heading out to a next meeting at the university. So, Madam Clerk, if you could please read item 27, please. Report from Economic Development Recommendation to authorize the city manager to enter into an agreement with California State University of Long Beach Foundation in an amount not to exceed 1 million. District one. Great. Thank you. I'm going to give up before we go into the staff report. I'm going to go out and give some opening comments and then I'll turn this over to Mr. West and another councilman. Gonzales also will have some comments, comments as well. I want to just say that I think there's no there's no question that one of the best things we have in this entire city is our university. And Long Beach State is a very, very special place. And we are so fortunate in our city to have a university with the students, the faculty resources that we have, one of our faculty members here in the front row, in the front row who does amazing work and so many resources in in the staff and in everyone that works at the university. And so we're lucky with the economic impact that's being made. There has been a proposal that the city and the university have been working on for the last couple of years, and that has been to bring the university to downtown Long Beach. And as we know, when universities go to downtowns, the downtowns thrive and the students also open themselves up to incredible opportunities and experiences. This has been a proposal that has many parts. One large piece of it is actually bringing faculty, classrooms and teachers and students to the downtown to learn. And there is also a phase that we're talking about that also includes student housing and faculty housing that is affordable and accessible for our students and faculty to also be here in the downtown tonight. What we have in front of us is incredible work that's happened between the university and the city as it relates to the classrooms and the educational component. It's a huge, huge step forward, one that everyone should be proud of. I have to really thank Councilwoman Gonzalez and her staff for being incredibly supportive and shepherding this deal through the process and really to the work that staff has done and the university to get us here today. So with that, I want to turn this over to staffer one for a minute. They're going to do a presentation on this, and then I'm going to over to President Connolly. Mr. West. Economic Development John Keisler and our workforce director, Nick Shultz. So good evening, Honorable Mayor and members of the Council. The purpose of the recommendation and proposed grant funding tonight is to engage with California State University, Long Beach College of Professional and International Education, CPA to deliver a best offering of classes closer to the city's professional employment center on the city's West Side and downtown business district. The downtown location of university classrooms adjacent to the Metro Blue Line will also provide a more convenient university access to the city's central and north Long Beach residents. The proposed ten year agreement of $1 million to the California State University Long Beach Foundation will provide the university with a portion of the resources necessary to establish 16 classroom classrooms, with an estimated 25 C each, 400 total seats to deliver CPE continuing education programs to advance the careers of current professionals and to provide additional space for classes provided at its main campus. That will conclude my staff report, and I'm available to answer any additional questions you may have with regards to the agreement. Thank you, Mr. Schultz. This time I'm going to have President Connally make a few comments, and then I'm to turn this over to Councilman Gonzales. Thank you, honorable mayor and council members. I'm delighted to be here today to speak in favor of this item. And thank you very much for presenting it. It gives us a chance to deepen our partnership with the City of Long Beach and really be part of the economic and cultural development of the downtown area. As already mentioned, this is a three phase project. The first phase will be educational. We'll be offering programs such as Human Resource Management Certificate, Emergency Medical Technician, Event Planning Certificate, Cybersecurity, an I.T. program, health science degree completion program, public safety, for example, criminology, social work degree completion programs, and a psychology degree completion program just as initial offerings that we've found from serving here would be popular. The second phase will be to establish an innovation center that we feel will spur innovation and entrepreneurship in this city. And the third phase that we're very excited about is to create faculty, staff and student housing that is currently conceptualized as 800, bringing 800 individuals in this in this third phase to the downtown area. So thanks for the chance to deepen the partnership. We're fully committed to the development of downtown and really want to be part of it. Thank you, President Connelly. And I'm going to turn this over to Councilwoman Gonzalez. I just want to say thank you to city staff of Nick and John and, of course, President Connelly. I know this is going to be a great addition to downtown now. This will be one of two innovation centers, the other which will be on third and pine, which will be lovingly called the Sean the McKee Innovation Center and connected with Long Beach City College and Blink Spaces. And now we have Cal State, Long Beach and IT services in criminal justice and cybersecurity. I would have never thought ten years ago that we would ever have two innovation centers with both of our academic institutions in downtown. And this is very, very exciting. You know, when we were away on behalf of the city, we talked about the patent office, that we have opportunities as well to talk about with in collaboration with Cal State, Long Beach. Currently, we have about 300 patents in the city and about a bulk of those are health sciences. So thinking about biotech and other sort of technology areas that we can flourish not only at the at the university but in downtown and creating and research and development is going to be a really exciting element for the area. So thank you again, everybody. And I know Tony Shoshoni is here as well, who has been a great part of this. And we look forward to this evolving. And I'm 100% behind you. So thank you very much. Thank you, Councilwoman Councilmember Durango. Thank you, Barry. And I want to thank President Connelly for being here today and for allowing us to participate with you. And I hope that we can take credit for this with the college promise that the city of Long Beach also went into into an agreement with the City College, Islamic State and the Long Beach Unified School District. And this is a great example of how college projects can and can really do great benefit and great work out the committee. Thank you. Absolutely. Thank you. Councilmember Pierce. Yes. I, too, want to applaud everybody's efforts for coming together on this. You know, Councilmember Gonzalez did mention. But I think it's your ten year anniversary, Cal State, Long Beach. Yes, mine, too. So it's been ten years this year since I graduated from Cal State, my college before Cal State was the University of Houston, which had another downtown location. And that really changed the downtown in Houston. And so I think bringing science together, technology innovation together, where you feel that energy around you is really important and really critical. And I know with our new main library that there also be some synergy there. And so I'm just happy to see our city working and thinking outside the box to really change the dynamics. So thank you. Thank you. Councilwoman Mongeau. Just a big congratulations to Long Beach State and our team for working on this every week. I am so impressed of the opportunities that are coming to Long Beach and what great things we can do when we all work together. Thank you, Councilor Richardson. I think you're right, Councilwoman Mango. It's like every week there's something amazing coming. This is a great move for for downtown. And I got to say, you know, there's multiple efforts in town and I'm learning more about the benefits when you get college off of campus and into the communities, all the exponential benefits that happen in those communities. So I'm excited to see that happen in the downtown. There's other conversations in Uptown, but in general, I'm really supportive of this effort. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Vice Mayor Andrews. Yes, thank you. And Doctor, I just want to let you know, these kids talk to my teen years. It will be my 35th. But with that, if programs like this, I think I would have still been there. Thank you very much for bringing us together. Yes, thank you. And before I go to comment, let me just also say that Councilmember Pearce's right when when the Arizona State University moved into Phenix and began opening classrooms, it just dramatically changed affordability, student access to affordable housing, the opportunity for faculty to engage with with the community. And it was huge benefits. And this is something that I know for for me and for for Councilman Gonzales and others has been a top priority to get lobbied state in a big way to downtown. And not only will the university open up a significant amount of classrooms just across the street on the other side of Long Beach Boulevard, where you'll be located, we're building, as you know, a large development where there will be affordable housing for faculty in the arts department. So you will have across the street gallery space, the university will manage. You'll have faculty and residents with earning their MFAs at in the Broadway block project just across the street and on the other side of on Beach Boulevard, you will have these classrooms and students and then you have the student housing and now you are adjacent from the Metro Blue Line and you're opening up our students to, you know, to the rest of the Los Angeles region and to the rest of the. And so I think it's a it's a really important and special moment. I'm just really proud of all the work. And so thank you again, Dr. Conley, to you and your and your team and to Tony Shoshoni, who is also helping make this whole thing happen. So thank you. Any other comment on this item? Seeing nonmembers, please get Ancaster votes. Motion carries. All right. Go beat. Congratulations. Thank you. And let me now go back to the presentation that we have. I'm going to turn this over to Councilmember Durango.

Recommendation to adopt resolution approving to appoint John Gross, retired annuitant, as an interim appointment to a vacant position during recruitment for a permanent replacement in the Financial Management Department pursuant to Government Code 21221(h) and an exception to the 180-day waiting period for Public Agencies pursuant to Government Code 7522.56 and 21224. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_12082020_20-1196

District nine. Ocean carries. 50. Report from Human Resources recommendation to adopt a resolution approving to appoint John GROSS as interim appointment to a vacant position during recruitment for a permanent replacement in the financial management department citywide. And in a motion in a second place. Came motion by cancer, a piercing, a concern for Austin. Is there any public comment on this item? Yes, we have issue Shukla. Hello, kids. One question. Do we know in rough dollar terms how much money was left on the table over the past two and a half years by not having a community choice aggregation program in place? I think. Thank you. That concludes further comment. Carol called out this. District one district to. I was sorry. District two, Sergeant. Councilmember Pearce, District three. I. District four. District five. II District seven. II District. Eight. By District nine. All right. Motion carries. Okay. Thank you. Item 52 is moved at 53. Item 51 is remaining. 5151 Report from Human Resources Recommendation to adopt a resolution of intention to amend the city's contract with CalPERS to include a mandatory employee contribution of 3% of compensation earner bill towards the city's required employer.

Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by amending Section 2.01.380; and by repealing Section 2.01.390, all relating to officeholder accounts, read and adopted as read. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_04182017_17-0269

Okay. Thank you guys for being here. I really, really appreciate you guys coming out tonight. Thank you. Okay. And again, item 16 with Paul that I want to make sure I mention that again. So we've got a couple more items that were asked to be moved to the moved to the start of the agenda. So we're going to do item 24 next and then item 18, we'll try to get to these items here and they do the public comment as well. Madam Court. Can we read them 24, please? Item 24 is a communication from city attorney. Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Manager Code relating to office holder accounts read and adopted as read City Y. Okay, I know this is the second reading of the ordinance that was in front of us before is actually your public comment. Is there any public comment on this item? Please come forward. And then we'll go to Councilmember Pearce. My name is Steven Downing and I live in Melbourne. Sure. I have commented in writing to my council representative. And all I want to say is, is that. There has been zero. Transparency. On this issue. The memo issued by the. City attorney's office. Today, it was used by this council has not been made. A part of the package is probably about violation of the Brown Act if you consider it. The last time I was here. My only complaint was. There's no. Transparency. So I would recommend to the Council that this item be returned. To committee and the committee produced. Reports. There is nothing on the. Website that tells us any kind of discussion. Of this matter. It is merely a. Move to undo a. Reform movement. In the late nineties. So I recommend that the Council take this back to committee. And treat this matter. With the transparency that a democracy in Long Beach. Deserves. Thank you very much. Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please. Good evening, American Council members. My name is Dan O'Leary. I live in Beaumont, Shaw and Susie's district. I had to come up to speed on this item quickly, but basically I'm urging you to vote no if you do vote. I suggest that Steve is suggesting that we don't do that tonight. I see really no reason to it. What I was able to read, find, and then I did read the deputy city attorney's letter on this was that we're trying to align with. The. State government rules on this, but it's not clear why. And there's some some buzz about there being a constitutional right to be able to transfer money as free speech. That all sounds like it needs a. Lot more vetting. To me. It generally sounds bad if if there is going to be a vote on this and it passes, or is there going to be limits to the amount of money that can be transferred? I think there's a limit to the amount of money you can accumulate in your individual funds from. An individual contributor. There should be some sort of modest limitation on the money that can be transferred. To other candidates. So please. Consider tabling this and. Not doing this tonight. Thank you for your time. Thank you, sir. And I'm going to close the speakers list. The lady there is the last speaker. Next speaker, please. I shall make Mr. Goodhue the last speaker. He's the last speaker? Yes. Good evening. My name is Glenn Stoltz, and I've sent many of you letters regarding this. And my question to all of you in the beginning was, in what way does this benefit the residents of Long Beach? And I received no answers back on that question. The only councilperson who returned an email to me was Gerald Supernova, which I appreciate. A couple of you responded online and but still I didn't get an answer to that question. Additionally, I think that if you were to adopt this sort of ordinance or change this ordinance, that transparency, fair elections and the ability for newcomers to enter into elected offices is diminished, which I don't think is a good thing for the residents of the city. Also, I would also say that the fact that the last meeting was agenda ized as a study or a feasibility for this issue and suddenly turned into a an ordinance change, a rewrite of the ordinance. So there were there was talk of Brown Violation Act in the I think it was the press telegram, but which I think should be considered. Also, Janine Pearce, who introduced this, said that she and her colleagues have been talking about this for a year now. And for that to be true and for nobody here to be able to or willing to write back and express how this benefits the city, I think is pretty outrageous. So, Ivo, I mean, if I were to vote, I would ask you to vote no on this item and put it away. So thank you. Thank you. Madam Speaker, please come forward. Hi. My. My name is running. I'm in the fifth district. I'm against this measure. I mean, let's call it what it is. This does no benefit to the cities, the residents of this city. It only benefits the people here, the elected officials, nobody else. This is like a Kabbalah activity. That's all it is to it. This these funds were specifically put in place to not do this. And you guys are doing this. We have a situation where the mayor has got Lena Gonzalez and and Jimmy Pierce, who were on her election committee. Now they're now they're suddenly they're they're chair people have an election oversight committee and that only the mayor can appoint. And suddenly this thing pops up. There's no no visibility at all of what's taking place. We don't have any any study of what's taking place. So this thing was deliberately trying to be sneaked through through this. I'm I'm just going to say what it is through an obvious way to try to make the residents be sleepy and not know what's taking place. I praise Darrell Super now for speaking up and at least saying, Hey, look, what is this for? Because had he not done that, the residents of Long Beach would not have even known that this thing existed. This is just trying to sneak through. Let's also be honest with this thing that the we want to make things. The state law is a joke. This is just a narrative that's being used by the elected officials to try to take money that is not theirs, that they did not deserve it. They did not even earn it and are going to use it for their own political purposes. That's what it's there for. This is not going to help even people who. Are trying to compete with. The incumbents and do things on their, you know, on their own. And so all I'm saying is we need to get a safe playing field. We need to be honest. And we need to also ask ourselves, why do we bring things in front of the city council when it doesn't do anything whatsoever to benefit the residents? Why is it there? You're only doing this for yourselves. It's a selfish thing to do, and I'm just going to say it straight out. This is what it is and you guys all know it. There's no secret behind it. And the people that know it know that some of these people are going to be reelected. And believe me, you're walking off a plank. Once this thing starts getting known to the public, you all know it. We all know what you did, and we all know who's orchestrating it too. Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please. So thank. You, Mr. Mayor. City council members. City staff. You know, I didn't know much about this issue just until recently, and I feel that it won't decrease transparency or increase transparency, but what it will do is just increase distrust. There is nobody that you've heard so far saying, oh, what a great idea. It's wonderful you're doing this. This is not good. You know, we all see that. We know that. And it feels like it's being rushed through. You don't let the public know about about it. No, I'm not saying receive and file, but I am saying it returned to committee. Let's discuss this. Let the public know more about this. It this looks like a conflict of interest because this will benefit you. It won't benefit us as a person who has contributed to campaigns. In the past. It really makes me not want. To contribute to campaigns. And that's not what you want. You don't want your campaigns by by contributors solely by unions or special interest groups or other characters like that. You want the public to contribute to your campaign. You you want a dollar from every one of us in this city. And that way we all have a part of what's going on. You really don't want this. This is a conflict of interest for you. And what you need to do is put it back. If you want to continue to discuss it, let's all of us discuss it and make it more public. As far as getting in line with the state of California, that's not a reason to do this. It's not a reason at all. Please do what's best for the city of Long Beach and its residents. And Daryl, thank you for your position. And Stacey, happy birthday. We're going to a birthday thing for Stacie at the end of the meeting. So you want to stick around next week? Katonah is that August 7th district. Over 20 years ago, the city council did. Not look like it does today. Previously, there were no district elections. Very few women and people of color were on the council. The council did not look like the city that I lived in over 25 years ago. The city went to district elections for city council and school board. In 94 we redistricted and had our first Latina serve on the council. That same year, the Long Beach campaigning for measure was passed and all was. It was all in an effort to level the playing field so that we could have representation that looks like the city. Well, I think we did some of that. And now our city council more and more reflects its population. Today we have a measure that is over 23 years old. Updating some of the terms of the officeholder account. To be in line with the FEC guidelines is appropriate. The city has a leadership role in the region, like the other 80 cities in the county, by allowing us to utilize age accounts as permitted by law. We can support candidates and officers that have the vision and support policies that help our city and our residents. We have a disadvantage because we are in the minority. And now that majority of cities have a more lax or no campaign contribution limits. Many have rules that allow FCC allowable activities in regards to age accounts, and many have no term limits. And the members that there are some members that have been there for over 20 years on the council in many cases. Long Beach is a leader in the region, but we are at a disadvantage unless we update our rules to adhere to the PCC guidelines. We're also at a disadvantage and should look at limiting our city council terms to three terms like L.A. Most cities around us have no term limits. This hurts us on a regional boards and commissions. We are lucky that our mayor in his first term could get on the MTA and that Ortega was able to get on Coastal Commission in his first term. The environment, transportation issues of clean air and prayer are a priority for a city. But unless we are at the table, we sometimes miss out. Last time we had someone on a committee was over 11 years ago when I was elected to the governing board. It's not a coincidence that the Ports Clean Air Act and plan for early and Long Beach was prioritized because L.A. had a mandatory seat and Long Beach had a seat. Was was elected to a seat. Updating our campaign finance reform is important. And because it makes us more relevant, it makes updating our office so it makes us compliant with the law and it does protect our city from lawsuits. Updating our terms of office is also important. You're all, for all intents and purposes, a part time council, but you get 25% pay. You should get at least 50% compensation. We are a growing city and one that is nearing half a million. Most cities that reach the mark start look that mark start looking at structure and making changes. Even Fresno have a full time council council. They start looking at a strong mayor form of government, start looking at revising campaign reform laws and are appropriate that are appropriate for large cities such as Long Beach. It's like a child that's growing. Sometimes the shoes don't fit anymore, so you have to change them. Or we start looking at clothes our kids can grow into. I support this idea because it protects the city. We need policies, regulations and structures for a growing city. One of the half a million changes needed in the city is growing. Let's promote a political infrastructure that we can grow into it. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hello. My name is Carmen Huxley and I've been a resident in Council District Number three for. At least seven years now. I'm a happy resident. Hasn't always been easy for me and a victim of crime and high. And we're going to be prosecuting it soon because the statute of limitations. Is as long as I'm alive. But at any rate, I wanted to mention and remind the group here that. Our federal government has. Said that money is a form of communication. And if I give my money, I, I didn't do this. But let's just say I support the mayor. If I wanted to give him money for his upcoming reelection, which I hope that someone runs against him. But at any rate, yeah, it's not funny. Thank you. Thank you. And I'm going to sleep better tonight. But anyway, I just like to remind you that money, as far as the federal government is concerned, is a method of communication. So if I'm giving my money to Dr. Garcia, he shouldn't be able to turn around and give that money to Mr. Price. That's all. So please keep that in mind and table this issue. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. And our final speaker, Mr. Good. Here, please come forward. Yes. Although the speaker two speakers ago essentially articulated what the councilman in your anger would have articulated a word for word. At least she was better looking. As I indicated last week, this clearly does not pass the smell test period. And those that doubt that need to understand the target that is on their back. The convening authorities at the federal level. Well, no, every time you change your jockey shorts. And that's why the stench that flowed from last week's council meeting. In many cases, it's probably not that often. I'm handing out to you something I picked up yesterday. I've had these out to people to help that if they have problems with it, with the stench to put on their nose. And I went out to Home Depot to pick them up and I walked in and I asked the greeter there where they find them. And he sort of laughed. He said, Well, gee, I haven't seen Kossmann since my mother did the laundry. And he said, Well, you might check over there. I found him, came back out, and as I was walking out, he asked, What are those for? And I asked him, first of all, what city do you live in? And he said, Long Beach. And I didn't ask him what district. Isaias explained what was being brought before the council tonight, as well as last night as his instant reaction was, No way. Not at all. Period. No ifs. No answer. No buts. It's corruption. Period. And indeed last week's. Tactic by the mayor to even try to usher it through a little faster by reverting to the Seinfeld. His Seinfeld method of using the Seinfeld's Kramer method of entering into leaving a room, jerking the agenda around, because maybe by that, if he didn't, Councilwoman Pryce would have been in there. And my hope in God is that she would have expressed the same view that I did. Although in more diplomatic terms, this stinks. Period. It will be your legacy. And it will undoubtedly. Lead to at least one, if not two. Joining the mayor is cell mates, period. As soon as we get the federal master in here, which I think is going to be about 120 days period, so bring it back if you want. But no way. And no matter how you launder it, it still comes up as corruption. Period. Thank you, Mr. Good. You. We're going to take this back to the city council now. We have a motion in a second. I'm going to go and turn this over to Councilmember Pearce. Thank you. I wanted to thank everybody for your civic engagement, for staying attuned to what we're doing. It really means a lot that we have a civically engaged community, which is core of what I've tried to do on every single agenda item that I've brought forward. And this one is no different. I want to make it clear on a couple of items. One, to address transparency. It did go to committee and it's now at its last reading. And I want to thank our city attorney for bringing this to our attention. And really, the fact is that this is about eliminating a conflict that we have at the city. This is about nothing more than eliminating a conflict and protecting the city. And so with that being said, I want to say that this simply aligns our rules with the current case law as well, clarifying these issues in his memo today. I really want to ask my colleagues for their support. Thank you so much. Thank you, Councilmember. And I just wanted to make sure, because I think it's it's worth it. Mr. City Attorney, I know you and I had a conversation as well. And I do appreciate, obviously, you kind of laying out the memo and what current state law says. But I want to also just talk about kind of there's two questions I know that I kind of asked you, and I want to just make sure we for the public's purpose that we that you couldn't tell them what you had told me. The recommendation that is in front of us today does approving the recommended change I know it's on its final reading eliminate the current conflict that exists in our code with state law? Mayor Members of the Council. Yes. The the action that we were directed to bring back on the amendment by the City Council to repeal that section will eliminate a potential conflict with state and federal law. Under the Citizens United case, which came out in 2010, and the SEIU versus Fair Political Practices Commission case out of the Ninth Circuit, which talks about the contribution spending restrictions on those findings are political speech, and they've been held to be protected by the First Amendment and that in order there has to be strict judicial scrutiny. And what the council what the ordinance currently reads as a complete ban at this time. So by the elimination of that complete ban, you are being consistent with state and federal law. Thank you. And also and to and through the attorney, I know I asked you this as well, and would you recommend that we approve the change tonight to eliminate this conflict? It would be in the city's interest to eliminate the conflict. At what time the council decides to do that is a policy decision. Thank you, Mr. City Attorney. They are going to go in and go to a couple of council members, controversial panel. Thank you. We had some electronic problems up here, so I apologize for being out of my seat for a while. Let's see if I can regroup. First of all, I'd like to thank everyone for attending tonight and speaking, and I'd also like to thank all the online audience for their civic engagement over the last few days. And thank you all for even emailing me, contacting me, texting me. And for the 100 people that texted me, I know my voicemail is full, but it's been that kind of a weekend. What some of the online comments and I don't think I've ever seen an issue so polarizing. Until tonight, I had not heard anyone in favor of this. 100% of online comments were opposed to this. And one of the things that struck me, because I've been very close to this issue, I sit on the Elections Oversight Committee. So tonight will be my fourth vote on this issue more than any other council member. So I've been seeking answers since a little over a month ago. I think it was March Tuesday, March 14th, when our election oversight committee met. But what struck me about the comments was a couple that said they questioned our ethics and someone said, let's start an ethics class. And someone else responded, right, teach ethics to politicians. Okay. For those of you who don't know, we are required to take ethics training every two years. I served on a commission for seven years. I was also required in that capacity. So since 2007, I've taken the ethics exam every two years, so I'm sort of familiar with it. I think whichever side you are on this issue, this body fumbled the ball. And I'll go back to one of the parts of the the ethics training in involving public perception. He says public service ethics is not only about doing the right thing, but also about the public's confidence that indeed the right thing is being done. That's where I think we failed, because somehow someone got the message that we were just totally self-serving. And that's not our job. Our job is more than doing the right thing, as the training says, we have to communicate to that public. So on behalf of the Council, I apologize to everyone for us not doing that. Now at that. Meeting a little over a month ago. I question the deputy city attorney. She's not here tonight, but anyone could go back and watch the video. I was digging for answers. I asked multiple times, what is behind this? What is the rationale? And that's why I'm suspicious of a document that comes out today in the 11th hour. Why wasn't I told that a month ago that this was the motivation behind this? So for that reason, I will not be supporting this issue tonight. Further to Mr. Parkin's rationale that Citizens United took place in in 2010, and I should say about citizens, you know, you talk about public trust. I think the Bloomberg survey in September 2015 rated that. And I believe 78% of the general population wants Citizens United repealed. So if you wonder why the local folks aren't for this, there's a good rationale right there. But that date, Citizens United was in 2010, SEIU. You gave an earlier date. My question is, if it was a problem in 2010, why did we take the action in 2014? It wasn't an issue in 2014 after the fact. So for those reasons, I really can't support the measure tonight. But again, thank you for all your civic engagement. Thank you, Councilmember. Councilwoman Price. Thank you. I want to thank my colleague, Councilman Supernova. And this is really an issue that, you know, last week the vote happened within a few minutes after the start of the council meeting, which was the first council meeting. I think we have had in my time in office that started exactly of 5 p.m. and I got here at 520 and I missed the vote last week. That is important because I feel that it was one of those decisions that was well-intentioned. I read the memorandum from the city attorney's office today, I think, and I don't know if this is correct, but I believe that what the memorandum is trying to say is that our local ordinance was superseded by state law. Is that right? Councilmember Yes, I think what we're trying to say is that if our ordinance as written, we would if someone were to violate that provision of the ordinance, we would have a difficult time to enforce that restriction on the contributions. So basically the ordinance, as it's written, reflects the intent of those who put the ordinance into place in 1994. But it's not enforceable. This this provision was, I believe, adopted in 1999. But that's correct. Okay. And so I struggle with this because from a legal standpoint, I think there is definitely logic behind why we're doing this. But as those who have followed my thoughts on this issue know, I hate the idea that fundraising is such a big part of local politics. It's really impossible to get in to politics unless you're independently wealthy or unless you're able to raise a lot of money. And I shared that in 2014 when we talked about raising the limits for the officeholder account to begin with. So I have a struggle with the issue personally and morally, although I understand what the state law is. And from a legal standpoint, I understand that we're not in compliance with state law. But but I think it's an issue for me that's much, much bigger than the legal parameters. I do want to acknowledge Councilwoman Councilmember Pearce, because I think she's in a really difficult spot. She is chair of a committee that is in charge of a code that's outdated. And I think there have been efforts to try to update this code for years. So the timing of it is not ideal for her because there has been efforts to try to update this code for many years. So I don't think there's any ill intent behind the the item. I think it really is a clean up item. So with that, I want to thank Councilman Superhot and I, too, will be voting no on this item. Thank you. Members, please go ahead and cast your votes. Bitcoin cash revolts. But not. Voice. Vote for you, please. No. And what is your vote, Mr. Count? My mango. Phone numbers. All the. It's not working. Okay, Councilman Austin. Should I. Oh, okay. No, I'm fine. Okay. Motion carries. Thank you. Okay. We're moving on to the next item, please. Item 18.

A bill for an ordinance vacating a portion of an alley bounded by 15th Street, Wynkoop Street, Wazee Street and the Cherry Creek, with reservations. Vacates a portion of the public alley bounded by 15th Street and the Cherry Creek and Wynkoop Street and Wazee Street, with reservations, in Council District 9. The Committee approved filing this bill by consent on 2-14-17.

DenverCityCouncil_03062017_17-0153

Ayes, two nays. Council Bill 156 has passed. Madam Secretary, can you please put the next item on our screens? And, Councilwoman Black. Will you put please put Council Bill 153 on the floor for passage. Thank you, Mr. President pro tem I move that council bill 17 dash 153 be placed upon final consideration and do pass. It has been moved and seconded comments by members of Council. Councilman Cashman. Yes, I have a question. Mr. President. Is Angelica Sears in the house? It's kind of like I walked. Down the red carpet. And so last week when this was put before us on first reading, I asked if there was a response from the fire department, and you indicated that there was. And then we found out that there was a little bit of confusion there. Can you go through that. For me, please? So, yeah, last week I did say that there was a response from the fire department. So this is what happened. So one of our agents, John Reynolds, he called Dave Clark of the fire department to discuss this very specific vacation and asked him if he had any other comments about this vacation. He indicated that he had no other comments. So what John Reynolds did then is follow up with an email saying this is just an email confirming that you have no other comments. He did not respond to that. What I was referring to or what I misspoke on is that they did have a conversation. Okay. And can you describe the inn in case. Of a fire on on how. The fire department would approach that particular situation in the alley? You know, to be honest, I cannot speak to that. I believe one of the representatives can. Good evening. Council members Brian Connolly with the law firm of Art and Johnson representing unico properties. So the requirement of the fire code is that there be two points of ingress or egress access to the building. And so for any one of those buildings is located along the alley, you've got the front door, which is either on Swasey or on Wynkoop, and then you've got the backdoor which is on the alley as you move down the alley. And I only know this because I was in a meeting with Dave Clark from the fire department on this on November 3rd of 2015. And so as you move down the alley, there's actually a bridge over the alley as you get closer to our client's property. So a hook and ladder truck actually cannot access all the way down the alley. A hook and ladder truck can only go as far as the bridge over the alley. So you still have two points of ingress and egress from each of those buildings. You have the point that's on the front side on either wing Cooper wasI, and then you have the point that's on the back side. So a hook and ladder truck could drive down the alley. It would then back out once they're done fighting the fire. But they do have access to that to that building. I also just to follow up on on Mukasey's statement, we also have a letter dated October 3rd of 2016 from Scott Briscoe, the chief building official, which confirms that the vacation of the alley would meet the requirements of the building and fire code. Okay. Thank you. All right thing. No other comments. I'm comfortable with passing that through. Okay, so no, you don't need a vote anymore, not a secretary, since it's already been moved and seconded and put on the floor. What do we need to do if we're going to move it to the black vote? We're doing the first and second degree. Then we can cancel it and just put it with the black vote. So that would be Councilmember Black in Herndon. Any objections from Councilwoman Black or Councilman Herndon? No. No. All right. So go ahead. Move that back to the black vote. Um. They think that all our items that were called out, all of their bills for introduction are ordered published. We are now ready for the block vote on resolutions and bills on final consideration. Kels members remember that this is a consent or block vote and you will need to vote I. Otherwise, this is your last chance to call out an item for a separate vote. Councilwoman Blackwell, you put the resolutions for adoption and the bills on final consideration for final passage on the floor. I move that resolutions be adopted and bills on final consideration be placed upon final consideration and do pass in a block for the following items. 17 Dash 015 117 Dash 022 517 Dash 022 717 Dash 022 817 Dash 022 917 Dash 022 317. Dash 013 117. Dash 013 217. Dash 167 17. Dash 022 117. Dash 2023 217. Dash 022 216. Dash 1202 17 Dash one 4317. Dash zero one 5317. Dash zero 155. It has been moved and seconded. Madam Secretary, Roll Call. Black. Eye. Espinosa, i. Flynn, i. Gilmore, i. Herndon, i. Cashman. I can each. New. Assessment. Hi. Mr. President. I. Madam Secretary, please close the voting and announce the results tonight. Tonight, the resolutions have been adopted and the bills have been placed upon final consideration and do pass. Since there are no public hearings, and if there are no objections from members of council, we will not take a recess this evening.

Recommendation to: 1) Direct City Attorney to draft a resolution entitled the Long Beach Values Act of 2017, affirming the City's commitment to the laws adopted in SB 54 (De Leon) and the City's continued support of the California Trust Act; 2) Direct City Manager, through the Office of Equity, to partner with local immigrant rights organizations, the Long Beach Sanctuary City Coalition, Centro Cha, California State University Long Beach, Long Beach City College, and Long Beach Unified School District, to write and present a local policy that expands on SB 54 in 60 days. Policy considerations should include: · Protecting and advocating for local DACA and DREAMER students. · Preventing future deportations of local residents. · Examining partnerships with LA County for local legal defense fund. · Protecting the confidentiality of local immigrant residents and their information, and ensuring no City resources are used to create registries based on religious affiliation, immigration status or any other protected class such as gender, sexual orientation, race, etc. · Affirm an

LongBeachCC_09192017_17-0825

Okay. Thank you. Why don't we go ahead and do that at one of the other hearings? Really, really briefly. Actually, no, we're we're we're back. So we're going to go ahead and do the item, actually. So, Madam Clerk, why don't we read item 23. Communication from Councilwoman Gonzalez, Councilmember Pearce, Councilmember Ortega, Vice Mayor Richardson direct city attorney to draft a resolution entitled the Long Beach Values Act of 2017, affirming the city's commitment to. Laws. Adopted and SB 54 and the city's continued support of the California Trust Act. Direct City Manager through the Office of Equity to partner with local immigrants rights organizations. The City of Long Beach. Sanctuary City Coalition. Central Charter. California State University. Long Beach. Long Beach City College and Long Beach Unified School District. To write and present a local policy that expands on SB 54 and 60 days. Thank you very much. I might turn this over to Councilwoman Gonzalez. Yes. I want to thank everybody for their hard work on this. I know many of us have been working on this for some time and and all of the organizations are here. And I'd like to thank them as well. Central Cha, the Sanctuary City Coalition. I know Long Beach Unified School District. We've involved them as well. Latinos in Action, Filipino Migrant Center, Long Beach Immigrant Rights Coalition. There's so many of them. Long Beach City College as well as Cal State. Long Beach. So as we know, this is a city that is the most diverse, in one of the most diverse in the United States, home to large communities of Latinos, Cambodians, Filipinos, Asian Pacific Islanders as a whole, and so many other cultures from all around the world. And as we know, one in four Long Beach residents are foreign born, and roughly 20% of those are considered undocumented, which means every resident in the city of Long Beach will be affected by these policies of some sort. As the daughter of an immigrant myself, I know firsthand the value of our immigrant community brings to the city of Long Beach. And frankly, if it wasn't for my mother's and my great grandmother sacrificed to come here, you know, we I certainly wouldn't be sitting in this seat. And I don't think that they ever thought that as immigrants, that their daughter, granddaughter would be now pushing policies to protect our communities in that sense. In addition, we heard from the federal government recently. The administration decided to end DOCA and we know that there are thousands of DOCA recipients here in the city of Long Beach, Cal State, Long Beach, Long Beach, City College and beyond. Approximately 800,000 of those young women and men received work permits and deportation relief through DOCA since its inception about five years ago. But I believe we need to do more here as a city. So what the item entails for all of us to understand is that there is two things. First, we're going to reaffirm our SB 54 promise. We put a lot of our efforts into State Bill 54 to ensure that it was passed, which it did, but it limits the detention for inmates with ice in it, curb state and local agencies from collecting and sharing personal information and release dates from local jails. So it will reaffirm our our our support there. Secondly, we will work through the Office of Equity to partner with our immigrant rights organizations, many of whom I mentioned earlier, and to make sure that we're partnering with them to do things such as protect our DOCA recipients and our immigrant communities as a whole, prevent future deportations, and to make sure we're working together to integrate our immigration, immigrant communities such as in ways like the work for making sure that immigrants have a place to access to employment, recognition of various things such as recognizing their out of country diplomas, affordable housing. There's so many different touch points. And I want to thank Jessica from Central CHA for bringing that information forward, because I think it's really important that we not only address the fact that there are issues going on with deportations, but it's a really comprehensive issue. This, in essence, is our this is our sanctuary policy. And it's a Long Beach Values Act is what we're calling it. We're revamping it because this is something that I know that is very important to the city of Long Beach. Every city has something a little bit different, but this is us. So not only does it provide protections, it will provide resources to our immigrants. So, again, I want to thank each and every one of you for your support in this and just know that we I personally will support you going on through through the many years as we tackle through these very hard challenges. And again, I want to thank everyone that's been on board with me to educate me as to what we could do a little bit better here locally and also as our as the first city to have signed on to the resolution with SB 54. So thank you very much. Thank you, Councilwoman Gonzalez. Councilmember, during the second hour of the motion. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor. I, too, am the result of immigrant parents. They came from to our vehicle. They came to El Paso, where I was born. So I'm a mixed Tex. Then came to Los Angeles, came to Long Beach to do my studies and then and so on and so forth, through to the present to where here I am today. That is very important. Back when I was a community college trustee back in 2004, 2005, there a resolution was brought forth for the DREAM Act that went through various iterations, but it never got passed. So DOCA came forward as a response to Congress's inability to pass the DREAM Act. The Dream Act. As many of you may know, is provides a pathway towards citizenship, something that I guess Congress has a hard time dealing with, but I guess are dealing with it now. And actually it's getting some bipartisan support. But that doesn't resolve what's happening with Chuck. We still have students that we represent participants who have submitted applications and who are now in limbo in regards to where their application goes from here. Should it sunset in March or at a time when kind of the president feels appropriate for him? So we have a quite we're in a quandary because we also have new applicants, people who want to apply for a new, darker status and want to continue their residency in the U.S. and work and most importantly, study, because that affects a lot of students who want to continue their education. They came over as young people went to our school system, are now ready to go into higher education, get their degrees and go on into the workforce. And there are some examples of people who have gone through our educational system and become lawyers and doctors but are afraid to practice because of their status. So Darker provides an opportunity for those individuals to apply for a work permit and continue their careers until there is a pathway towards citizenship, which the DREAM Act will hopefully someday provide. Whether the events that I held this weekend, I have the Fiesta in the park on Saturday for a celebration of Hispanic Heritage Month. The day before, I had a reception. I and Dr. Connolly from Cal State Long Beach co-hosted a reception for Latino leaders and students at the Miller House, which is the president's, for lack of a better word, mention, I guess. Full. Very nice. Very beautiful. But whether the thing. Well, and one of the items that she brought out that day that morning, in fact, was that Cal State, Long Beach was setting aside $200,000 to help DOCA participants pay for DOCA status. That brought it. Yes, please. That brought a chill in my skin, brought a tear to my eye, because there's nothing that I care more about than anything else is the education of our children. And this provides that opportunity. So what we're doing here today is to protect those students, to protect those participants. I may not be well-known to everybody here, but it certainly is known to the 14th floor. I have a target participant working for me. I'm here and I'm proposing this and supporting this motion to protect her because of this fails and she goes away. She's out of a job. Not only is she out of a job, but she's in the registry where they can find her and deport her. And I cannot stand for that. She needs to be protected. As all, not the participants need to be protected. And I hope that with the assistance and the support of my council members that we will in fact not only protect Dhaka students everywhere, but our Dhaka participate on the fourth floor. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, we have Councilwoman Price. Thank you. I want to thank my colleagues for bringing this item. And I am very, very happy to support it tonight. I'm grateful to the governor and the folks in the state legislature for working together to come up with amendments to SB 54 that I think were definitely deficient in the first draft of the ordinance and long until just until recently were fixed. And at a place where I think they allow for for prudent dialog between local and federal authorities, but not on the issue of immigration. I fully support us doing everything that we can to support those who want to gain naturalized citizenship here, helping them in any way that we can. This is I to let Councilwoman Gonzalez, my mother, naturalized here as a citizen, and I came here when I was seven and learned how to speak English when I was seven. And I believe that we live in a country that should be doing everything that we can to help people find comfort and freedom here. So I'm grateful to support this. Thank you. Thank you. Vice Mayor Richardson. Thanks. Just want to chime in from a spot on this item. And you know, I hope that we can continue to follow the conversations in congress. Around daka. We have a special fed led committee meeting tomorrow night on disaster preparedness, but we plan on passing our federal legislative agenda at the following meeting in November. So. So at that meeting in November, we will likely evaluate where the the law is in Congress and try to take some action there. But again, I'm going to vote in support of this. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Councilman Gonzales. I'm sorry. You can go ahead. Councilman Austin. Thank you. And I will be supporting this motion as well. I don't believe I believe that our dreamers have contributed greatly to our country. They contributed greatly to our city. I, too, have a dreamer on my staff as we speak. And she's doing great work. She went to Cal State, Long Beach political science major, and she's come in and and done some wonderful work in our office. We would hate to lose her at this point. And and but more importantly, her family is a wonderful family. And this the the the repeal of of DOCA by the administration proposes to to to break up families. And I think that is the absolute wrong way to go. And so I'm in full support of this motion, and I think our city should be fully in support of of our dreamers. So thank you. Thank you to. Well, I as one of the sponsors obviously stand with all of our immigrants. And I'm going to continue to stand with them. And I'm really glad that we have the state that kind of laid out some some boundaries for us so that we can continue to say we support workers and immigrants here in our city because we've done so at the state level. And so I'm very thankful to have my colleagues on this item. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Mongo. I support chambers. I support state. Law. I really wish that we would follow our own process. 54 has passed. And this should have gone to our state legislative committee. And I think that a lot. Of the components of this are moot at this time. But I feel that we are a. City, that we support our residents. And with that, I hope that we can work through a process where state items. Go to the state committee and federal items go to the federal committee as we have set forth as our policy. So for that. Okay, Councilman Andrews. Yes. Thank you. I think the individuals in line, I think you can tell that this is a no brainer. You want it? Okay. Yeah. I'm totally supporting this item. But thank you, Councilman Austin. Yes. So it's great to see, though, that there's a majority in support already on this item. But I did have have a question quickly regarding the specifics to the author. Councilmember Gonzalez, it says, direct the city manager to the Office of Equity to partner with local immigrant rights organization to lobby Sanctuary City Coalition, Central Charter Council, their Long Beach Lobby, City College and Long Beach Unified School District to write and present a local policy that expands SB 54 and 60 days policy consideration should include blah, blah, blah. Is that coming back to the Council for the policy? Because we set the policy is that are those stakeholders going to recommend the policy to the city council for us to bring forth. Well, that they can add in. Yeah, absolutely. They're going to work together. And I think in conjunction with everything we've provided here, which is a lot of what they'd been asking for already, I think we can bring something back that is solidified within 60 days. So yes, they will work with the Office of Equity. They're going to craft something, come back in 60 days, and. Here we are. And it'll come to the city council. Yes. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. There is a councilman, mongo. Any chance it'll see the light of day at that state ledger before it comes back? I mean, if it's brought back with enough notice. For the state led committee, it's already passed. I realize that. Exactly. I think we should follow state law. I think that's a reasonable position. Just a. Thought. Okay. Okay. There's a there's a motion in a second. Let me go through the public comment now. Please come forward and we're going to do the first couple of three and then we'll get down to two like we did all the others. Go ahead. My name is too short and it won't stay down and I can't read. The thing on the podium goes down actually, which will lower it a little bit for you. Go ahead. It'll lower for you technology. Okay. Thank you. My name is Linda Fox. I'm a recovering that is. Retired academic, but I'm here tonight representing National Council of Jewish Women Long Beach. I am a recently retired state policy advocate for California. There are three of us in the state from the national organization Anti-gay. California supported SB 54 in its most visionary form as a priority bill. And in fact, 75 around the state supported through a lobby day and made 40 visits to legislators that day. It's not a perfect bill, but it's a crucial step forward. And what we need here without any delay is a local sanctuary policy which will address the gaps, the gaps in SB 54 and end and ensure that Long Beach City resources are not used for deporting people. The faith, faith based perspective of National Council of Jewish Women informs our actions on behalf of repairing. The harm and separation. Caused by a broken immigration system. We, as people of the Jewish faith are commanded to help heal the world, not cause destruction. And so that old adage, love your. Neighbor as yourself does not mean. Only citizens or people with papers living in the constant fear of deportations and law and and also fear of law enforcement have has a great impact in a number of our Long Beach neighborhoods where immigrant families. Live and work. I don't have to go into the fear factor. You know, it affects adult. Children. Young adults. DOCA, everybody. And no one should be. Forced into these difficult situations. A.J. W Long. Beach supports a Long Beach where everyone, regardless of immigration status, can live and work. In safety and dignity. A citywide sanctuary for all policy drafted with community input will defend the dignity and civil rights of the people who call Long Beach home. Please vote yes on drafting this policy. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Hello, everyone. My name is Carla Jimenez, and I'm with Latinos in Action. Every human being matters and does not deserve to be filled with walls of UN security when taking their children to school or conducting daily chores. The safety of our community is important if our immigrant community is in fear. We suffer. With them because. We cannot have a peaceful community. Long Beach needs a local sanctuary policy to prevent future deportations from families being separated. If families live fear of deportations or the law enforcement, this is going to keep causing a negative impact in the community and then even in the people's health, every human being matters. Let's go sanctuary now. Thank you. Okay, thank you. Next speaker. Hi. Good evening. My name is Gaby Gascon. I'm a member of the Democratic Socialists of America, Long Beach and on a bi and Long Beach, which is a Filipino youth and student organization. And both of these organizations have been involved in the Sanctuary Long Beach campaign. And I work in the Second District. I speak to you today from a place of privilege. As a second generation Filipino American, I don't have to spell out the struggles that immigrant communities are facing today. I'm sure you are all well aware and I've seen my own family members go through these struggles while they're in the process of getting their papers. And it's I'm sure it's a common experience among your constituents and the people in this room. The city should be prioritizing the safety and well-being of those who make Long Beach a rich, multicultural city and ensure that their quality of life is just as good as everyone else's. And honestly, but last item is really frustrating to sit through. So I'm going to do my best to stick with this speech. But, you know, there has been support from city leadership for campaigns and developments that would directly affect those people that we need to be protecting the most, such as the 2028 Olympics. And, you know, like enticing Amazon to come set up their headquarters in our city when inviting with them the issues that directly affect immigrant communities like, you know, gentrification, contractual jobs and displacement, a militarized police presence, it drives out diversity, as we can see in the city of Seattle, which already has the Amazon headquarters. Tourism may be good for the rich, but we should be more concerned with the long term effects on the working class people who call Long Beach home. We have a chance to shift that focus from profits and revenue to the needs of the people. And yes, immigration enforcement is not a productive or appropriate use of local resources, but the Long Beach Police Department already. Has like 48%. Of the city budget. So with all of that money just assuring public safety for a, you know, a certain class of people and not the most vulnerable in our society, it's crucial now more than ever to show support for this legal fight here in America and protect everyone so our communities can continue to thrive. When people are not living in fear of deportation, they're more willing to report crimes, utilize public services, and enrich their lives by working or going to school. And especially now with talk of being rescinded, we often hear the language used to humanize the undocumented with their worth being placed in their occupation, their degrees, or their GDP value . First and foremost, these are human beings. And now before him, American I and everyone and on a bond is reminded of a community's forced migration. It's caused by 100 years plus of U.S. imperialism, which has kept our country economically undeveloped. That is why 6000 Filipinos leave the Philippines every day to find work overseas. 1 million out of 4 million Filipinos in the U.S. are undocumented. 20,000 Filipinos reside in West Side, Long Beach, and 130,000 Filipino youth are eligible for it. So do one right thing tonight and vote yes on this. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. I'm really apologizing in advance. There is no way I would be able to follow that up. My name is Stephanie Morrison. So I'm a resident of the second District and a member of the Democratic Socialists of America Long Beach Branch. When I originally made the speech, I was intending really to be able to compel some recalcitrant members of the council into voting in favor of it. However, with the unanimity that's being expressed here, I think that there is a real good basis for going forward, perhaps with a more expansive form of this sort of legislation, purely because if we are in put it frankly, if we are not provoking federal response against it and against the city, it is an inadequate policy. The federal government has made it clear, it has made it clear that they are going to be continuing on a race based deportation strategy, taking away residents and of the city people who have lived here for. Honestly, who cares how long and who cares about the amount of economic value that they contribute to the city? They're human beings with rights to exist without without fear. That if they complain about. Unsafe work conditions on their job, then they could be risking deportation. Or if they drop off their child. At school personally instead of that, they could be risking deportation. Robert It wasn't until 1986 with the amnesty bill that your own family had the ability to be able to stay here without fear of retribution from the fear of ice. And it was linked to a comparably sane Republican, you know, Ronald Reagan, that you had a legal status to be able to be the mayor. Here today, we have a much different federal government here today. We have a Republican Party that is refusing to acknowledging to a demographic shift and is refusing to organize politically outside of anything beyond white supremacy. That said, we need a local policy that strenuous and direct enough to be able to challenge the federal government and show them what the real intent of their this sort of deportation strategy is that you never get it. Thank you, Stephan. Next speaker, please. Good evening. My name is streaming chair and I'm a senior staff attorney with the National Immigration Law Center, which is headquartered in Los Angeles. So Long Beach is long overdue in passing a policy to protect immigrant residents who have been facing the threat of deportation since long before the current administration. ICE agents and. Deportations have been present in the city for years, terrorizing communities and separating families. So I applaud this effort to begin work on an ordinance. And some key. Points of an ordinance, I think, would be to make sure that information. Collected that's related to immigration status is not shared with ICE. Also making sure that local law. Enforcement is disentangled from. ICE and not spending local resources on immigration. Enforcement. We know that often people go to the city for critical services and we don't want people to feel deterred or scared. To access these services out of fear that somehow their personal information, including their status or their home addresses, will be shared with ICE. In addition. I wanted to stress that what you're undertaking is fully legal. As you know, the city has the discretion to decide how to use your local funds and also the discretion to decide how the local law enforcement resources are used. It's been. Jurisdictions that have decided to comply with ICE, that have. Been the ones that have faced lawsuits and often had to pay out settlements. So language should. Really craft. Policies that protect the dignity. And human rights of all its residents. And I encourage you to do so as. You'll be standing on the right side of history. Thank you. Thank you. Just 1/2, sir. We may have just lost quorum, so I just need to make sure we get it back. Give me one. Give me 1/2. Okay. Okay. Go ahead, sir. Thank you. Okay. Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. And council members. I'm Bob Collegian. I live in the third district, but my church is two blocks north of First Congregational Church of Long Beach. And I am the chairman of the Board of Social Outreach, Outreach and Justice. We take care of a lot of the. Members of our local community. We offer afterschool tutoring and a summer day camp. We we have a charter school, lots of Hispanic kids in the area. And all I can say is that I'm really grateful and want to applaud your courageous and compassionate move today. And I want to also recognize and I hope you recognize that it's just a small thing that you're doing in some ways because it's giving some protection. But the work that we have to do, as many organizations here in the city is ongoing to create a rapid response teams, to educate the the undocumented community and so forth . And I want to us to both applaud the efforts of many organizations here in Long Beach who are going to carry this sanctuary movement clearly into the next few years because of the chaos in Washington. And I want to thank you very much again for voting for this this resolution. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Hello. Can I can I give you this document before I start? Sure thing. The Political Ticker right over here. The attorney. Well, yeah. Well, we'll give it to the attorney. No problem. Well. Pretty much. I'm going to the mike so we can get a recording. I want you to start by saying. That a lot of these problems are side effects. The real problem that's not really being addressed, and that is that the cost of living is too much. So how do we get the cost of living down and how do we get more money into their pockets so they could spend it on your infrastructure and your business? Right. So how about we propose an idea on how we can make the common person pay to build their own home? Solving a lot of these issues all in one fell swoop. And making the cost of living zero. How is that? How is that wrong? How is that bad? And how is that not a solution to a lot of how these problems are coming up? And there's a lot of talk about buttons, right? And so how about this is a solution to not push that button or make it where we don't have to push the button? It's that simple. It's everything that we're doing already is just how we're doing it from this point on could be different. So what I'm proposing is a bill to allow that to happen. Is that okay with you guys? You can continue. All right. Well, first of all, you know, there's all this money getting thrown away into the garbage, literally by spending the money on getting rid of the trash. So how about we create a new industry on making the trash into the homes and making it safe and healthy for people because people are already doing it in parts of the world that aren't as fortunate as the United States. So how about we make jobs that way and we turn deserts into rainforests and make houses for people who can't pay for them for themselves? Right. But I'm sure that if there's an empty lot that's $3,000 a month, I'm sure 12 people could get together and pay that off every month. And if in two months you could finish the development, in six months, you could grow your food and look for zero. How does that not get money in everybody's pocket? And how is that not make everybody satisfied with how they're living? Because honestly, I'm not that rich and I'm pretty fucking happy. Thank you very much. Next speaker. Hello. Hello? Council members. Mayor. Some of you guys know me. Some of you guys don't. My name is Rashid Daka, and I'm a business owner. I live on the second district. I own a business with my family. I'm a barber. Our business has received salaries. Honor. Honor as California Business Day Award for our efforts with our community. I'm also a board member. Of the Long Beach Immigrants Rights Coalition, and my speech was a little different. But instead of I urge you, I thank you for seeing us, for. What we are. We are not a number or a word. We are people. We are sons, brothers, dads, moms, neighbors, coworkers, friends, and your local barber. Who, by the way, we employ as citizen. We are part of a big puzzle that makes Long Beach. Long Beach. Thank you for seeing who we are and how important it is to protect. Us, because protecting us is protecting lonmin's thinking. Thank you so much next week. Speaker, please. Good evening. Counsel folks. My name is Chris and I am a campus leader at Cal State Long Beach, and I'm here in support for the for a sanctuary city. The students of Cal State Long Beach have been advocating for undocumented students since way before the establishment of similar situation. We have been applying pressure to our ministration for a time. And resource center. As of now, the the funds that were allocated for DACCA students was not just out of the kindness of. The administration, but through the pressure. Of the students as we organize to inform the needs of undocumented students. As a student leader, we have been targeted, being privileged and documented here. I can only imagine the fear that undocumented folks experience on a daily basis. And I urge you to move forward in this ordinance. And thank you for your time. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Hi. My name is Riley. Never Meet is. Many of you know me for many times that I have been speaking in this podium. But it's not a secret that I am an undocumented person. But at. That doesn't stop me to be helping my community, to be involved in my community, try to fight for truth and justice in this time. I'm not a scare about me. I know that I'm the comment, the person, but I'm not a scary mommy. I must care about those kids that sometimes has been talking with some of them and they say, I don't want to go to the school. I ask them Why? Because if I go to the school, when I come back, maybe my mom and my dad is not going to be at home because they are going to be. Take it. It makes me feel really, really sad seeing those kids, having those trauma kids who are in preschool practically three years and a half , something like that, because they hear they know kids are really, really smart. And I really here to us to protect these families. I work with community when I do door knocking and I tell them I'm working with housing issues. Do you have to report your landlord? You have to call this back. Don't you have to do this? You have to do that. And they say, no, I'm scared because the landlord to me that they going to send immigration, they're going to send ICE and they don't talk because the laws. Things that there is living in this condition. Living in this way. I. Because I am that position and in that situation I know how is that? But like I say, start thinking not only. And those parents that thinking on those kids are the future of this country. The young ones, those kids being charming their whole life be growing without their parents. Is what you earn in this city. We need to do something and we need to do it now. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker. But just like we did for the other items. So now we'll go down to 2 minutes, please. All right. So good evening or good night, city council members. My name is Jerry Menez. I'm a resident of District two and I'm a youth organizer with the Filipino Migrants Center. I'm born and raised here in Long Beach, and my family came from the Philippines in the late eighties. And I'm also a son of a former undocumented mother. My mom has been in this country for over 24. Years as. A caregiver taking care of the elderly. She has always loved giving back to the elderly and making sure that they are well taken care of. Caregiving jobs are one of the only jobs available for Filipinos that are leaving the Philippines every single day just to provide a better life for their families. My mother has faced lots of struggles raising her two twin boys, and we wouldn't see her for months at a time since she lived and with the patients she experienced being taken advantage of by her employers because she was undocumented. Sometimes she she wouldn't even receive or check on time and wouldn't even get paid for all the hours she worked. Other times, employers call their racist names and degrading names. These are some of the things that undocumented caregivers like my mom go through, and they give everything to the elderly and to our communities. But in return, they're left in the dark and treated inhumanely. She's not the only one that I fear for. I also fear for the youth that I also work for with the Filipino Migrant Center. A majority of the youth are immigrants and some are undocumented and recipients, just like my mother. The youth and the families came to this country to have a better life. My youth fear for the families, friends and communities and even themselves. They may be deported. They have worked so hard to get an education in this country and now they and their loved ones can be deported tomorrow. I have learned so much from them because they are our future leaders in our communities. So we do need a local sanctuary policy and we want you all to vote yes to I mean, creating and drafting the sanctuary for all policy for Long Beach and for the city. So whether it's a mother, caregiver, doctor, recipient, youth, family. We're all people and we're not illegal. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Council members. My name is Christopher Chavez. I'm a resident of the sixth District. And first, I'd like to thank council members Gonzalez, Pierce, Yanga and Richardson for bringing this resolution. To the council. The proposed ordinance of the council. Even though that it appears that there is definitely a majority for this or that, I still feel that having this public comment is an. Important exercise to go through because it. Shows not only do you care about our undocumented residents, but it shows that Long Beach cares about our undocumented residents and this community stands for its people. I also. You know, I can't claim to be a representative of the undocumented community because I. Myself was born here. But I am most of the grandson of immigrants. I have many friends, many, many friends who I care deeply about who are under ICA. And personally, I feel that those people are more representative of America than any Nazi, any clan member, any writer, anybody who threatens the threatens the diversity of this country. So, again, members, I thank you for your work on this, and I look. Forward to seeing what Long Beach does to continue making me proud on this issue. Thank you very much. And go beach. Thanks, Chris. Always keeping that school spirit, which is good. Next speaker, please. Hi. Thank you for having me here. My name is yes. I am a staff member of Filipino Migrant Center, but I'm also a member of a grassroots migrants organization called Migrant. And I would like to share some of their stories with you because they got be here tonight. One of our members here in Long Beach works for as a caregiver. She's been working for an agency for more than three years and she's being paid $8.75 per hour, which is below minimum wage. We all know that. She asks for a raise, and when she did that, her employer told her, You don't have papers. Who are you to ask for a raise? She found out later that that employer reported her to ICE. She is a single mom and she is having a hard time finding a new place to work where she is safe and still being paid well. It's hard to find places like that just because of her status. We have another member and she's being paid $6.50 per hour as a caregiver as well. And she's undocumented as well, but she's too scared to file because her employer has too many connections and she's scared that her family will be divided because of that. Her family lives with six people in a one bedroom apartment. Because that's all they could afford. I have a lot more examples that I can bring up. It could be much worse, too. But my point is that there are people, employers out there who use the fear of undocumented immigrants to exploit them, abuse them, and get more money off of them. And what we're asking is actually quite the minimum. I feel like the California Values Act is getting watered down. So I'm really asking for a Long Beach to consider a much stronger just trust act. I mean, and so yeah, just use your position because you know, the more they're getting criminalized here, the more they're being abused. And you have this opportunity to make some change in that. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Hello. My name is Michael Sole, author. I live in the fifth District represented on the city council by Councilmember Stacy Mango. I am chair of the Social Justice Council at the Unitarian Universalist Church of Long Beach. One of the seven core principles of Unitarian Universalist churches affirms the democratic process. We believe that everyone should have a voice and a say in matters that affect them. It should therefore come as no surprise that we are nearly universally registered to vote, and we exercise that right and obligation in every district in Long Beach. Today I speak in favor of sanctuary for all, regardless of what our county, state and federal governments do. We need a local sanctuary policy to prevent future deportations by limiting information collection. Ending cooperation with ICE and ensuring city resources are not used for deporting people. Unitarian Universalists believe in the inherent worth and dignity of every person. That belief is unqualified. It does not assert that someone's worth is predicated on a piece of paper, the land of their birth, the language they speak, or the color of their skin. We believe in justice, equity and compassion, something that is sorely lacking in the policies being coming out of Washington. While we will work for comprehensive immigration legislation at the federal level and at the very least DOCA, we also expect our local communities to resist unethical and immoral treatment of human beings who are, as some have noted, Americans in every sense of the word except for a piece of paper. I urge you to support sanctuary for all. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Hello, council members. My name is Donna Leone. I live in the seventh. District and I'm with the Democratic Socialists of America, Long. Beach. So I myself am. The child of. Immigrants. My parents were undocumented immigrants. They came to this country from Mexico. And for 23 years, they were undocumented. And for. 23 years, they lived in fear every day. That it would be the last day that me or my sister would see them. Me and my sister would come home from school. Afraid that we wouldn't see my parents again. And we need to make sure here in Long Beach that nobody ever needs to go through that again. Nobody deserves to live. In that fear. We don't we're not we're not a free country. If we can't just secure this basic right that people don't live in. Fear of being deported every day. We can't call ourselves a free country. We don't have even that. And ice, I want to. I can't emphasize this enough that ICE. Is a soulless agency. ICE doesn't care about human rights. They violated numerous, numerous human rights multiple times. And they don't deserve an ounce of any support of any resources from Long Beach. Forget that. They don't deserve any support. They don't. They shouldn't exist, period. But they do. So Long Beach needs to make sure that zero resources go to ice, because ice. Plain and simple, is going to terrorize our immigrant communities here in Long. Beach. So I want to thank you for your vote. I want to thank. You for helping us out. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Goodnight, Eden. To have us feel representative for Congressmember Alan Lowenthal. He wanted me to read this. Statement. About this item. I want to express my support for the Language Values Act of 2017, affirming the city's commitment to SB 54 and the city's continued support of the California Trust Act. I also encourage. The city to work with local immigrant rights organizations. To write and present a local policy that expands on SB 54. A city wide policy will help prevent future deportations by protecting the confidentiality of local immigrant residents and their information, and by ensuring that no city resources are used to create registries based on religious affiliation, immigration status, or any other protected class like gender, sexual orientation or race. The presence of federal immigration agents in our community has a negative impact in neighborhoods like Cambodia town and central Long Beach, where many immigrant families live. Living in constant fear of deportation has a tremendous impact. On the health of those immigrant families in our community. As you may know, I have. Been a longtime advocate of immigration reform and family reunification. Deportations destroy families and communities. Please support the Long Beach Values Act and protect these vulnerable communities. Thank you. Thank you so much. Next speaker, please. Hi. My name's Angela Perez. I'm a resident of the second district. Sorry, I'm. A little sick. As an undocumented student, we often say undocumented, unafraid. But I am here. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. But I am here to say that I am undocumented and very afraid. There is fear in our community. Fear of separation of families and the country we grew up in. My parents brought me here at. A very young. Age to. Show me the importance of education. They started juggling 2 to 3 jobs, each while raising four children. Them, themselves being undocumented, often. Faced a lot of discrimination and hatred for fighting for what. They believe. Then all they hoped. For is for their children to have access. To higher education. This nation was. Built on the values of freedom and. Strength. My parents, as well as myself, deserve to live in a community away from fear and deportation, as well as discrimination. As a doctor recipient, I may temporarily receive some protection, but I fear for the two people who raised me and taught me the strong values I hold and act on. For the community who showed me how to fight for my rights and for my undocumented sisters, brothers and parents. The time is now. To act for all undocumented communities. For the dreamers and their parents. For a safer space. A sanctuary city and inclusive city to all because we. Acknowledge hard work. And commitment. I urge you to make Long Beach Sanctuary City and continue to push for SB 54 and open the discussion. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Oh, thank you, Speaker. Thank you very much. Hi there. My name is Connor Locke. I'm a resident of the third district. Thank you, honorable mayor and council for being up this late. Thank you to all your staffs for being up this late and the staff that's here supporting as well. I remember the last time that this kind of resolution was here before the council. I was here then as well. I thought that was a late meeting. It's my first really lake meeting since I moved to Long Beach, and I remember that the four honorable members of council who proposed this resolution were in support of the original SB 54 as well. So thank you, Councilwoman Gonzales, Councilmember Pearce, Councilmember Urunga and Vice Mayor Richardson for supporting it the first time as well under the cover of the state advocating in favor of this passing the bill. It's much safer now for members of the Council to support such a such a message to the federal government supporting the citizens and the residents, whether they be citizens or not, whether they want to be or not of our city. And I thank you for for affirming this today. And I hope you continue to live up to that, that you decided to seek public service to serve those people who live here, those people who we have invested in and who will invest in our communities. So thank you. Please keep it up. And the next time a decision like this comes before you have the courage to support it the first time. Rather than waiting for someone else to give you cover. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good morning, everyone. My name is Kieran Harper. I live in the third district and I'm here representing the Long Beach Area Peace Network. We want to thank you all for still being here and caring about this issue. We want to be on record in support of the expanded Long Beach version of SB 54. We want to state that we want local resources to build better lives, not to terrorize, and that just like no babies, a bastard. No child or adult is illegal, capable and corporate can cross borders easily and wreck wreck wreak havoc in communities. People are worth more than absurd, nasty laws. Thank you. So much. Next speaker, please. Hello again. I might not yell this time, but I can't make any promises. Again, for those who don't know me, my name is Nerida. I was born and raised in Long Beach and I live in the ninth District. I was born I would lived in the ninth district my whole life. And what I've seen growing up in Long Beach has never Long Beach has never felt safe for me, even though I love my city and I love the people that live here. Long Beach City Council has never represented me or my community. And I'll tell you why. Growing up. My. The worst thing somebody could go through, I couldn't document. My mom is undocumented and my sister is undocumented. I was born here. But to grow up with that fear that maybe. Would take my support system would be taken away from me is the worst thing you could live through. I grew up in Long Beach, where in Long Beach Boulevard and 53rd Street Ice Van showed up during the Bush times and took my neighbors took everybody that was there. We happened to get away and we ran and we told everybody and everybody here. But that's Long Beach. That's the Long Beach that I know. That's the Long Beach that I grew up in. And that's the Long Beach that still exists. We need a sanctuary city that represents us. I am tired of being called an immigrant. We are native to this land. This is our land. I am not an immigrant. My mom is not an immigrant. The border didn't cross. I didn't cross the border. The border crossed us. We have been here since the beginning of time. Go dig in the freeways. Go dig in the dirt. You'll find my ancestors there. I know that my people go to the museums. They look like me. We are native to this land. This sanctuary city is to protect the people that are. Native to here. We should not be kicked out because colonizers because people like Trump. Want us out. They're afraid that America is looking brown again. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Thank you. Council members. Thank you for for this discussion. I really think that this this legislation this this ordinance doesn't go far enough. We need an ordinance that helps people register to become a regular real citizen workers. They come here and they're in the shadows. There's 800. 800,000 students that are in the shadows. There's 11 million people that are in the shadows because. They don't have a path to just becoming someone. They have names. They have they have mothers and daughters and sisters and everything else. And we just decide to call them aliens or decide call them whatever the colonizers want us to call them. When you say tomato, that I our God, that you're speaking that while you're speaking native language, that's from hearing me say Seattle, you're speaking native language. From here we are brown people. We were mixed. We're we're Caucasian. We're from everywhere. You guys clearly represent the. Diversity in this nation. And our poor. We we we exploit. Others, and we bring the price cheap here. Why not make them here and pay people here and have them register here instead of bringing basically allowing this illicit work to happen, instead of just letting them register and being real people. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. And a christianson, my son George. Two horses, Christensen, Lakota, my daughter's Omaha. You've already met her fighting against having a whole bunch of white people dress up like Indians. A fun activity every year. Put an end to that. Thank you. With your help. Miss Price for that. My son was talking with somebody about immigration who was saying, you know, we got to get these people out. And he said so. When did the door close? Like, when did that clock stop? Like, did it stop? Like last year? Did it stop when your parents came in to stop 100 years ago? When did it start? When do you get to say you're proud to be an immigrant but you don't want any more immigrants? When do you get to say that? Because it's interesting about time. You know, if you like I talked to a lady who doesn't want in Stacey's district, she doesn't want a five storey building on her corner and she blames it on these Mexicans coming up here. And I said, well, we're pretty far apart on that issue since my kids are Native American. And I believe that Native American people have been here a long time. And Native American is America is a European name, but indigenous is indigenous. India, China and India. Los Indios. They Christopher Columbus called them the indigenous people with God. Maybe. Who knows? He was lost. Still is. But the reality is, okay, I've only got 32 seconds, so I'm going to change the topic. But just just think about that. When you sit and make a law, we're still asking to make laws in spite of all the horrific laws, laws, you know, removing Indians, massacring its in the state, massacring Indians by law. So we're asking for another law. I'm all for it. But when you're making this law, I'd like to turn to the prosecutors in the room, Mr. Parkyn and Ms.. Price, and ask their special help in changing a pattern of our police, which is to overcharge everybody that gets arrested with a felony and then let them plea out to a misdemeanor. When you're charged with a felony, sometimes you get deported. This is a pattern. It's not prosecutor pattern, it's habit. It's our pattern. So let's change that pattern. Let's put a real hold on overcharging. People are charging them at all, really, especially if they're undocumented. Can the government next speaker, please? When does not is what. It's not just we're going to do the double the tempo and put them in double time. When it's not just an hour, I'll call Robert Garcia equals the hell is the personnel. Number is loaders Navarro DICKERSON is sooner Euna Lee literally be known as L.A. because like he Lagardere is he enters Wednesday and Thursday listing the legacy Angola Atlantic as a key and a presentation. Let me congratulate you on the icon and the fake communities organizations estoy para appoggiatura la comunidad immigrant. There can be a body that maybe an Iraqi immigrant they love a scene to San Quentin and lost an acquaintance but okay you always to your point but I guess was the Rachel's Santos but that was reporter for them believes in needle integrity that for families it's almost a parental support position is what case was now focused on Randle get less familiar so this integrin what if I were both a parakeet? Long Beach said I want us to that Santuario What is the madrassas? Yes support your is the competency on your Lisbon vigor aluminum. Mr. Mayor. Robert Garcia. Council members and staff. Good evening. My name is. Lourdes Navarro Dixon. And I'm a member of the Church of Divine Nazareth. That if you don't know Sereno, it's located at 600 East Atlantic and Fifth Street. And I'm here representing my congregation. I live in the Second District. I'm here representing my congregation and Echo, which is interfaith community organization. I'm here to support the immigrant community. My father also came as an immigrant in the fifties around 1950, and I'm asking that their rights be respected and that they can live without fear and insecurity. Please, we need the. Deportations. To stop. And this is causing families to break up. Please vote for Long Beach to become a sanctuary city. Thank you very much for your support and your understanding. May God bless you and shine his light on you. Just let just thank you. Next speaker, please. Good morning. My name is Kevin Yeager and I'm a member of the Democratic Socialists of America and a District one resident. Tonight, we're talking about people living in our city, working in our community, in our hotels and our port, making Long Beach into the beautiful city that it is. Despite this, many of these people live under threat of arrest, after which they could be sent to a for profit detention center, subjected to physical and sexual assault, and finally separated from their family and community. For many, the only community they've ever known leaving one's home and relocating to another country is an extremely difficult process. But we know many of the reasons why people are forced to do this. We know that many of our community members come here from Central America or Southeast Asia, fleeing conditions that the U.S. has wrought on their home countries, be they economic policies, military intervention or natural disasters supercharged by climate change, by Western countries emissions. So all this to say, it has always been and will always be the case that people are forced to migrate. We will always have many neighbors who are undocumented. And while we recognize that this racist and class's immigration system is largely outside of Long Beach is control, there are still steps that we can legally take to protect our most vulnerable communities by ending cooperation with ICE and ensuring that city resources do not aid in immigration enforcement. We can help protect we can help prevent some future deportations and help keep some families together. So I urge the city council to stand up for the dignity of everyone who calls Long Beach home tonight. Thank you. Thank you so much. Next speaker, please. Good morning. I'm going to make this quick. Our animal mayor and council members, thank you for being here this late. My name is Krystal Vasquez and I live in the third district. Miss Price, I am an alumni I call State Long Beach and a member of the Long Beach Immigrant Rights Coalition, which you all know. But most importantly, I am undocumented. And I want to thank you, Councilwoman Lena Gonzalez, for putting this in the borough, as called sponsors of the center city. It is recognized and sincerely appreciated. I am here tonight presenting this for the hundreds of thousands of Thacher recipients whose heart sank after the Jeff Sessions announcement two weeks ago. But I'm also here to represent my people people like me, like my mom and my dad and my two brothers, both of whom were deported. It is something that most of you have never experienced. All of you have heard about this, but it's just something that it is taken away. It's part of you from. A part of your history and part of your own. And they deserve their dignity and justice to know that we are here. For four months, we debated this entry policy policy. But our committee cannot afford more time. While you debate, our families are fighting this a partizan machine. In the last eight months alone, I have seen my father's business impacted his loss workers through the petition machine. And also I stood by my mother. Who? Bears the emotional burden of the situation. This is a way of life that is unjust and unbearable. To top it off, I haven't seen my older brother in over five years because of our immigration status and his birthday is this weekend. So I sent it as a testament to the relentless work of undocumented people have conducted. We have risked our livelihood, the safety of our families, and we have been on the front lines of this movement. And now we need you to be as brave and courageous. Immigrant community. And this is a lot of it. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Good morning. As my colleague researchers said. My name is Jonathan Solorzano and I am a resident of the ninth District and also a lifelong resident of the city of Long Beach. I wasn't planning on speaking, but I did hear. In the beginning that you were mentioning SB 54 and how we should follow state law. And I'm here to just point out a few things that are that can be problematic with that. We all heard of the passage of SB 54 out of the assembly and heading to the governor's desk. So this hasn't been signed into law yet. So we still need some work that we need to get done as far as advocacy efforts go. So for everybody out there, please call the governor and let him know we want SB 54 passed. However, with SB 54, two things that I want to point out, the biggest loss that came out of this bill as far as the amendments go is that the sharing of databases is still allowed. And this has been one of the biggest deep water causes of deportations that exist right now in the state and on a federal level. The biggest walk away that that came out of this is that local, local cities can adopt higher standards, and that's in the language. So we urge you to please take leadership and make the sanctuary lobby's policy a stronger policy that we can work with. We are looking forward to beginning those conversations with the city leadership and people like Jose Alvarez, who we all heard about last year, would actually still be here if there was a sanctuary policy in place. Unfortunately, he isn't. And because of that, there has been you know, it's been a helter skelter situation for him and his family. So please help us help people like Jose Alvarez, his family, and pass a sanctuary policy that benefits not just the DOCA students and the Dreamers, which is very easy to get caught up in. But the people who are most at risk of deportations, of people with felony convictions, the people who are most at risk of being deported. We need to help these people and we need to help them now. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Hello. Before me. Just make sure the speakers list looks like we're. We're close. I know we're going to have room. The Chico will be last on behalf of Janice Hahn, but I guess for everyone else, the speakers list is closed. Gentlemen, the back will be the last speaker. So thank you. Actually, Mr. Colby. The last speaker. After the gentleman in the back? Yes. Hello. Members of council. My name is Betto. My name is Norberto Lopez. But I go by Betto and I've been living in this country for the past 22 years. I came to this country at the age of one. I just recently graduated from Cal State. Long Beach did five years there. My goal is to return to grad school and become a counselor that doesn't discriminate folks based on status or religion or race. Right. I want equal fare for everybody. On behalf of the Sanctuary Long Beach campaign, I would like to present 622 postcards signed by Long Beach residents. And every single count in every single district. For the past five months, we have collected these postcards and heard story after story of people who have been living in fear. We have also heard stories about how taking a stand to in cooperation with ICE locally can help improve people's lives. People like Josette Alvares live, right? So I was a student during the time that his deportation took place. Right. And having to confront CSU or be police the chief and tell him, you know, that's unfair. What you did right otherwise and you did it is still part of your responsibility. And the fact that his family had to go through that trauma is very heartbreaking on behalf of all these people who signed cards, shared the stories and couldn't stay here. Late this morning, we ask you to support your local policy and vote yesterday. Thank you. Thank you. Can you also get the clerk to grab the card so we can take those? Thank you very much. Right? Yes. Next speaker. So good morning. One of the asked. My name is Maria. Once again, I am like a. Whirlpool of emotions right now. Obviously in the last month my life has been turned upside down and then right side up and then upside down and then right side up. And pretty much people play with you because you're undocumented. And it's not cool. But today I am glad to say that I would like to see a sanctuary policy. It will happen. But I'm also here to say that my family did face the deportation. My older brother was a victim of the present, the education and prison pipeline, and he was deported my first semester at Cal State Long Beach. I since then I filed probably before graduation like eight incompletes. I didn't know my brother's deportation was going to affect me the way it did, the way that it made me become a second mother to my brother and sister. But I do realize that my brother deserved a second chance. And I'm here for him today to tell you all that our education system failed him. Our legal system failed him, our immigration system failed him. He went to court. He got he got free and then was handed over to ice immediately. So I know that these things happen. I saw it. My family felt it. My family lived it. We continue to live it. We continue to support the families. But now we need to we need to start dividing communities. We need to stop using this narrative of dreamers. We are all dreamers. My mom's a dreamer. My brother's a dreamer. And we're all going to fight for something that protects us all. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Everyone stay calling. Clancy. Wylie Mosley. Good morning. When you see us. Oglala Lakota. Michiko. Michiko. No o'clock. Well, I'm here to let you know if you want to make America great again. Well. Take it back, you know, to real immigrants out there. This is our land, the great Turtle Island from Alaska all the way to Argentina. It's our lands. We are many nations as one. So I don't consider my brothers and sisters from the South to be immigrant. Why? Because she got a great culture out there. I have four years here. You see? Missing out on a bloody Spaniard, complimenting your own blood. Now what? So with that I would say classic asthmatic milk. To all my brothers and sisters that wants really to help me out here. We also do support them from each reservations out there. We all have banks out there for them without even asking IDs. We don't even ask in Social Security numbers. Our whole method called Yahtzee on my relations. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good morning, Bear Garcia, members of the city council, actually. Morning. I'm sure this is a record. I just also want to congratulate the council today and thank each and every one of you for your leadership and really putting protections in place. To reduce the stress in our community. Because I can tell you there is big time stress among our residents and youth. Every day we're processing applications and answering telephones and and this is all we hear. So I just want to applaud the city council and thank you so much for your support and putting protection in place. So we ensure that we're not criminalizing our. Families, our youth. Heads of household people who are really. Trying to do a good job and. Live as families here in our city. And also, I'm looking very forward to working with the city manager and the Office of Equity. As you know, our organization has been doing. Services for Latinos here in the. City of Long Beach for over 20 years. And so, you know, we. Still have not there has. Been over. 100 years of immigration here, and we still haven't immigrated. We're still living in poverty. We still. Are living in silos and really need. To focus on immigrant integration. So this is where we're really. Excited into working, you know, in partnership with the city and really integrating our communities into. The workforce development system, into our health system, into our neighborhood. System, into civic engagement and ensuring that, you know, they do have a voice and and that they're, you know, being consumers and they're being considered in affordable housing and being able to be homeowners in our city. So, you know, really looking forward to that. The needle. Definitely has to move for a lot. Of our Latinos living here in the city of Long Beach and so very proud. This is, as we know, welcoming New Americans week. We'll be celebrating on this Saturday, conducting applications for naturalization in Dakar. We look forward to hosting you, Mr. Mayor, at our at our welcoming event this Saturday. But again, just very proud of this council today, even though it's in the wee hours of the morning. And we all need to be out here and everybody that came in and provided their voice on this very important issue because it really affects us all. I heard all the council members say how they have, you know, students and dreamers while. Organizations do, too. And so, you know, we're working very hard. We're ensuring their. Protection, their safety, their. Education, really looking out for their economic development. And so we're doing our part and you guys are doing yours. And truly appreciate. It. Thank you so much. Just thank you. Speaker. When was the last? Good morning. And we keep it short. It's been a long day. Long night. I'll be honest, I'm not even from Long Beach. I'm from Gardena. But I came to support a friend. And I must say that as much as, you know, the son of an immigrant father, I can't imagine the fears that really run through their minds. But I'm really coming here as someone as someone who's coming from Cal State Dominguez Hills. I recently heard that Cal State Long Beach allocated certain funds for their doctor students. I wish I could see that at Dominguez Hills. I just wanted to really give you guys that shout out. And I. I know that it's not something that's easy. You know, I'm working with with the population, a population like that. I'm a part of an organization on at Dominguez Hills called the Male Success Alliance. And we are our goal is to improve the access, retention and graduation rates of young men of color. And that's something that's really big with a lot of the a lot of the middle school and high schoolers that I'm a mentor to. A lot of the fears, a lot of the their concerns. But in terms of what I really want to just really thank you guys is that the allocation of funds from Cal State Long Beach to their students, which is something that I wish Cal State Dominguez Hills would really pick up and get the message on. But thank you. Good night. Thank you. The president of council at the MIGA Sells is a Long Beach resident, so we'll have to let him know. Next Speaker Bass always getting that plug in her. Linda Chico Field deputy for L.A. County Supervisor Janice Hahn and I have a letter to read into record. Dear Mayor and Honorable City Council. Among many things, the City of Long Beach is revered for its diversity and inclusivity. It is a reflection of the mosaic of people unique to Los Angeles County, including a vibrant immigrant community. I commend you for your efforts to strengthen policies to protect all your residents through the Long Beach Values Act and support your resolution to the laws adopted in Senate Bill 54, as well as directing the Long Beach Office of Equity to partner with local immigrant rights organizations and educational institutions. I am proud to have coauthored an item at the county level that will also strengthen protections and increase resources for undocumented community. This is a very personal issue for me, as I also have a Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals recipient working in my office. He is a hard worker and does an exceptional job of assisting our residents in need. I have committed to him and to all other DOCA recipients that I will do everything in my power to help them continue leading productive lives free from fear of deportation. Here in the United States, the only country most of them have ever known. I strongly encourage the Long Beach City Council to make the same commitment to protect their residents by passing the Long Beach Values Act. Sincerely, Janice Hahn, Supervisor, Fourth District. Thank you. And Ms.. Chicka Pink. I know, I know. Part of the agenda item is to work with the county we've been talking to, to Janice about the legal defense fund locally and how the county can be a partner in that. So please thank the supervisor for her support on that. No see, no other public comment. We're going to go back. Councilman Gonzales. Any other additional comments? I just wanted to say thank you all again. I know we've been saying it's very late and you all have stuck through the whole night. So really appreciate the comments. I look forward to starting the discussions this week with all of you about how we can strengthen this. Thank you. And this will be and this will be back. Mr.. This will be back when Mr. Weston was sitting with the Office of Equity back to the Council in 60 days. Is that correct? Okay. With that Members, please cast your votes. Motion carries. Thank you very much. Motion carries. Believe it or not, we have a full agenda which will now start. So we actually have two hearings which we have to do. I'm going to encourage us to, beyond the hearings, maybe move everything to the next agenda. But we do need to do the hearings. So and if there's people here for any other items, we should get to those out of respect for folks that are here. So can we hear the next the hearing? I think I'm going to not sleep for the breakfast in the morning.

Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by adding Chapter 8.120, temporary enforcement of Long Beach Health Orders related to COVID-19; declaring the urgency thereof; and declaring that this ordinance shall take effect immediately, read and adopted as read. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_11172020_20-1054

Motion carries makes up 74. Recommendation declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by adding temporary enforcement of the Long Beach Health Order. Health orders related to COVID 19 declaring the urgency thereof and declaring that this ordinance shall take effect immediately. Read and adapted as read citywide. I have a motion by Councilor appear second by Councilman Ringa. No public comment. Please cast your vote. Mr. Mayor, we have one public comment. You okay? It's not on my sheet, so. All right, go ahead. Tiffany. Davey. Hi and good evening. And keep this short and sweet. Obviously, we're going to see, I mean, the council amendment to determine I'm 41. And then I was looking for further clarification on where the emergency order actually ends during the 20/31. Due to the. Continuously ever expanding nature of this pandemic. I would have liked to have seen this before in the future. Thank you. Thank you. That concludes public comment for the sun. 76, please. We need to take a vote. District one. District one. I district to. I. District three. I. District four. I. District five. I. District six. By. District seven. District eight. District nine. All right. Motion carries. Item 76 recommendation to direct city manager and all appropriate departments to seek approval, access and reimbursement from Caltrans so that the city can perform needed maintenance and cleanup. I have a motion by council member Eureka second black councilman Mongo. I don't think I see any public comment. Is that correct? We have one person, Elizabeth Magnusson. Elizabeth Magnusson. Yes. I'm here. Let's begin. Hello. My name is Elizabeth Magnuson. The freeway intersection at Willow and Lakewood serves thousands of residents and serves the Long Beach Airport. This intersection is currently the worst reflection of Long Beach. It is unsafe to use the crosswalk and drive around with debris of trash overflowing onto the onramp and off ramp and onto the street.

Recommendation to request City Manager to work with Homeless Services Department, Police Department, Mental Evaluation Units, HEART Team, Quality of Life Officers, Marine Patrol, Public Works, and Parks Recreation and Marine Department to report back on how the City can better address or enforce beach violations as well as the associated impacts it has on our beaches and residents. This should include: possible ordinance changes to improve the enforceability of violations of beach hours; added methods of preventing alcohol and drug use on our beaches through the City municipal code and through changes to current enforcement practices; and approaches to minimize trash, human waste, food waste, and large-scale littering on our beaches.

LongBeachCC_08142018_18-0688

Item 16. Communication from Councilman Price Councilmember Super nor Councilman Austin. Recommendation to request City Manager to work with various city departments to report back on how the city can better address or enforce beach violations and impacts on beaches and residents. Thank you, Councilman Price. Thank you. I'm asking my colleagues support tonight in supporting this item, which really underscores the importance of maintenance on our beaches. The item as written is pretty self-explanatory. So I don't want to waste your time by going into it other than to share that. In the third district, we have had a few incidents over the summer. We had one pretty serious incident where we had a junior guard participant step on a hypodermic needle and during the course of the summer, staff has been incredibly responsive. The city manager should really be applauded for his efforts to increase enforcement efforts on the beach and to make sure that encampments are cleaned up and dumped, items are cleaned up, and items that present a public health hazard are routinely identified and and cleaned cleaned up. But he's done so really in collaboration with multiple departments working together. Our police department and our Marine Patrol division have already been taking a lead on some of the homeless outreach efforts that we have. And of course, cleaning up our tagging for cleanup items that have been discarded on the beach, which has been really helpful. I think as we start to see more popularity and use of our beaches, especially with the recent Washington Post article declaring us as the city with the highest number of nice days, we're going to see more use of our beaches and of course, our parks and our open spaces. And I think it's it's important for us to continue to enforce the laws that we have for beach access, because the beaches, unlike a lot of other open spaces, require or invite people to be barefoot, to be digging, to be playing in an area where public safety hazards can be easily concealed. And so it's more important than ever that we start to really focus on continued beach maintenance and making that a priority in terms of our cleanup efforts in order to prevent any public health hazards such that we've seen over the summer and mitigate anything that might happen in the future. So I ask for my colleagues support. Thank you, Councilman Austin. I'm happy to support this item. Little known fact I spend a lot of time at the beach. It's where I find therapy and time with my dog and and usually on the weekends. And, you know, obviously, the the maintenance component is something is, I think, very important to the to the city of Long Beach. You know, we can't sell our city. We can't market our city the way we want to market our city. If our beaches and places of entertainment are not to the best that they should be. And so, so I'm happy to support this, um, and looking forward to, to gain some of the feedback from, from staff on this and looking to support it in any way I can. But I think more community organizations and neighborhood groups should adopt. You know. Beach cleanups, like just in what Rudd has done for many years, Heal the Bay. I've been a part of both of those beach cleanups. They happen pretty regularly. But we need more, more efforts like that to, uh, to really make an impact, but also more attention from, from our city resources as well. And so I'm happy to support this. Thanks for bringing it forward. Thank you, Councilman Pearce. And yes, I, I guess I would like to address that this item while I beginning, I wholeheartedly support cleaning up our beaches. I spend a lot of time on our beaches as well and definitely syringes and how we have well our trash cans. Ah, I know we've had lots of back and forth with public works about the best way to clean up our beaches. And so just on that item might ask a couple of questions just on the clean and safety part, since that's what the councilmember addressed in public in her comments. Could public could staff help us understand where we are with the type of trashcans that we have on our beach? And then, too, I know that we have machines that go out and they rake the sand and they pick up some of the debris. I've heard constituents talk about other other machines that do that better. I'm just curious if we have any assessment about how we actually clean from our sand, since that's the first thing. However, Craig, would you guys. Be able to answer the trash can question? Pardon. But if we don't have someone here answer the trash cans, we can certainly get that back to you. But certainly, we're one of the few cities in California that sweeps the speeches daily. So we have machines to do that. We did get an inquiry when Councilwoman Pryce mentioned that there was a needle issue on the beach. We prompted an inquiry from a company in the Midwest that is going to be showing us a vehicle that potentially could pick up something like that, like a needle or something like that. But we do have state of the art vehicles and we look at those. And if anybody has ideas for vehicles that we could, we certainly would look at those. But again, we are one of the few cities as we sweep speeches every single day and we're always looking at a better product. Great. Thank you for that. So I would just ask that in whatever report that comes back that that's included. I do recognize we have pockets where our beaches are extremely littered and pockets where where it's not. One of the things we do try to do is to do the big bellies at the beaches. So that right. So that so that so that it gets windy at the beach and trash doesn't spill and stuff. But we do have beaches on Friday. Saturday night, Sunday nights are just killed. Weather. It isn't just Long Beach. If you go to Huntington Beach or Bowl or anything, you can imagine the work that the maintenance crews are doing. Long Beach included at 6:00 in the morning, 7:00 in the morning on a on a Saturday or Sunday or Monday to take care of all of the the public activities on those nights. So, trashcans, I don't think it's possible to have enough trash cans where everybody will use. But definitely I want to let everybody know that when we've been addressing special events now. So we're pushing harder and harder and harder. So whenever there's a special event at the beach that there's. A walk through before. They leave, that they have to leave it as found. They have to put things near the trash can if, if, if it doesn't fit in the trash can so that we can pick it up first thing in the morning. So but we will get your report on that. And I've already the council has already asked us to look at adding trash cans along the beach. Right. And I know that, you know, that we ordered the big blue trash cans that are open on the top that the bags go in. But those are the exact kind of trash cans that get dumped over that people dig through. And I know that Public Works is looking at some options for a less expensive big belly option. So I would just it's been probably since the last budget, since we really talked about it. I would love to get a report back on that stuff. Thank you very. Much. Thank you. But the second thing is, I'm reading this item. And while yes, it's about beach cleanliness, I unfortunately, I'm reading it's about ordinance violations, crime. It's really about enforcement is how I read it. And so I just wanted to go on record in talking about how it is a challenge for us whenever we're talking about homelessness and crime and making sure that we are improving the enforceability of violations during beach hours, and that that's really what I read the purpose of this item, not so much just around the cleanliness. So I did want to ask our police chief just a couple of questions. I know that we have worked with our commanders and making sure that they're out there and enforcing. I wanted to ask, how many times a day do you think that we have officers that are down in our beach area? And what time of day do we do? We have folks out there and maybe is that the right time of day? Mayors, member of the city council. Councilwoman Pierce. It's we don't have regular scheduling down there. We periodically go down there. Both of our beach beats that are adjacent beach to the beach. They have jeeps where they're able to access the beach when there's dispatches and such down there. But and Deputy Chief Wally Ibish can talk a little bit more in detail if we need more detail. We do run specific operations that are as a result of specific complaints. So if we're getting complaints, no matter you name the time of the day or the day of the week, we will run operations concurrent with those problem days and and and times of the day where we have gotten significant stats, meaning people that we observe that are breaking the law who either get cited or arrested for things they shouldn't be doing. This is not just focusing on homeless because there are homeless people who are down there enjoying the beach as well during regular hours and that's okay. But if we go down there and someone is breaking the law, we do take enforcement action. And so on on that measure. Enforcement action, I guess drug use, things like that. What is an enforcement action for somebody doing drugs on the beach? For someone using drugs or in possession of drugs, every situation is different. But as you know, with Proposition 47, possession of drugs and using drugs is now a misdemeanor crime, which generally it's a citation. But that's not going to be 100% of the time, because if we contact somebody who either A is consistently a problem for us or we run them for warrants and we see an extensive history or they have warrants, they could end up going to jail. But it's the officer's discretion, depending on the violation that's occurring and the the individual's criminal history, whether they're going to cite and or arrest, which means actually taking them to booking and to our jail. Great. Thank you. I think that what I get a lot of constituent concerns on our beaches around what is what is a next step whenever they encounter something. And so we're constantly reminding folks just to call PD. And that's the biggest thing is having your presence down there. And I know this budget, we're addressing some of our staffing issues. So I think I guess my one other question for you. My last question I know we have a time certain would be is there an ordinance or a change to the muni code or ordinance that you feel like would change the situation on the beach that we as a city could do considering Prop 47 and everything else? I'd have to think about that a little bit more. There's always a possibility of doing a better job. So I would have to sit down with the city attorney's office, the city prosecutor's office, and do some brainstorming to see what can be done. But from as I sit here today, I believe that a lot of the laws that are on the books do help. But again, not to get into a long, drawn out conversation about criminal justice reform that works against us in a lot of these instances, specifically where a lot of the homeless people that we're dealing with. And again, I'm going to be very specific. All the homeless people we deal with do not have criminal histories. There is a percentage within that population that probably would have been in the Los Angeles County jail if it wasn't for criminal justice reform, who are out on our streets, specifically our beaches, who are the biggest challenges to our police officers on the street and the citizens who are complaining? And by the way, just for the public to know, there are several council people I'm looking at that have me on speed dial. Every time we're having these challenges and they have no problem getting a hold of either the city manager or myself when these issues arise. Great. Thank you for that. So I'll close out and just saying that I think that cleaning our beaches is a great item. I think the enforcement piece that's throughout this, I would have liked to have worked with that a little bit more in recognizing that if we have a population that cannot go into our jails, that no longer, that the idea of going to jail to sober up is no longer an option that we really implore a lot. And that on the back end it is the lack of having a space for people to have detox beds, for people to have a place to get better for mental health situations. And so really when I look at this item and some of our challenges on the beach, I just see it as an opportunity to highlight the need for us to continue our efforts that we've already done a great job on, on this Council to support those that are struggling with with mental health and addictions, because that seems to be the population that's down at our beach is causing some of the challenges. So I just wanted to put that in the record and make sure we talked about that a little bit. Thank you so much for coming in, answering some of those questions. Thank you. Got somebody, Ringo? Thank you, Mary. And I want to thank Councilmember Ginny Pierce for bringing up two points that were a concern to me and obviously to the to the presenters of this item. Councilmember Price, Superman Austin. The only concern I have is that we all know, and it's been said many times, that being homeless is not a crime. So we know that. However, we do have challenges when we have people hanging out on the beach and they're performing some illegal activities that we need to be aware of. And obviously with the results of some of those is that we have syringes and the bear pinata area that is left at the beach. And I certainly support the the efforts to clean that up and try to get better equipment to be able to separate the sand from from those items. But my my my approach on this and when I read it was I did see it as well as a enforcement type of issue. And I hope that when as you look at this and I spoke with the city manager about this previously, is that when you look at this, I'm hoping that we can determine that, you know, we ensure that there aren't going to be ordinances or any other kinds of of legal remedies that are going to limit people from accessing the beach, because the beach is for everybody. As many of you know, I served in the California Coastal Commission and access is is a big issue to access 24 seven and I certainly would not want to see ordinances being brought forward that would limit that type of access to the beaches, whether you're homeless or not. It's for everybody to enjoy and to basically be able to to have a day at the beach, whether it's during the day or in the evening, than they or specifically we would like. The conversation that I heard right now is all taking place about, you know, during during day business hours or during the day. But we know that people are hanging out at the beach at night. We know that. And so to have some of these egregious activities take place during those times. But I think that the the solutions that we need to look at are more towards response, you know, the heart team and and perhaps a public safety get out there and and have people move on if they're especially if they're involved in in any kind of egregious activities or activities that are going to get them arrested. But again, I want to make sure that if we are going to be looking at this and we're going to be looking at it from the perspective of a law enforcement perspective or a thinking of other kind of enforcement perspective that we don't have a ordinances or regulations passed that are going to be limiting to people having access to the beach and. That would be my only concern at this point. So I will be looking at that when the report comes back. And I certainly hope that we can work those issues out there. And we haven't had really an opportunity to discuss what types of remedies we would be looking at in terms of of any ordinances or suggestions, for instance, that will be coming forward before the city council. Okay. Thank you, then, Councilwoman Price. Thank you, and I appreciate my colleagues sharing their concerns. We did reach out to our offices other than than those who signed on to get input. And so I do appreciate the comments that we're hearing today. I will say absolutely. Councilwoman Member Pearce is correct. This item is about enforcement. It's also about enforcement in order for us to make sure that our beaches are maintained. The problem that we have is we have I don't know that we need new laws. We just we need to be enforcing the laws that we currently have. And we need to make sure that we minimize encampments and frankly, dumped property on beaches during the the last clean up on the beach. Public works literally removed a ton of trash from the beach. And that doesn't I'm not talking about wrappers and things that people littered. I'm talking about evidence of encampments that people have left behind the beaches. It is absolutely not illegal to be homeless. And this council has invested and will continue to invest as much money and resources as we can into outreach, education, services, anything that we can do to try to encourage people to take advantage of the many services that we have available in the city, and to procure more opportunities for services in the city, such as detox centers and housing facilities. That's absolutely a commitment that we have and will continue to make. But at the end of the day, you can't force people into services and you can't force people to accept services. So we have to enforce the laws that are already on the books that protect our residents. You know, I heard Councilmember Pearce say this twice as I want to go on record and fill in the blank with what she may have said. Well, I want to go on record as saying I'm going to do everything possible in my power to make sure that another junior guard kid doesn't strap on a syringe or that another member of the public doesn't step on a syringe. And if that means cleaning up dumped items and encouraging people to follow the rules that are already in place for the city, then I think that's what we should be doing. I do believe that our police department should be engaged actively in outreach, and they are. And I want to commend the chief and his command staff, because with very limited. Tools at their disposal. Because of recent changes in the law, they have been able to make some serious impact in the individual lives of people. I've had the privilege to go on ride alongs on multiple occasions with our quality of life team, and I can tell you they make a difference. That's that's what we should be investing in. But that doesn't mean that we ignore encampments that pop up here and there in violation of our existing local ordinances. If we're not going to enforce them, then maybe we should talk about removing them. But as long as they're on the books and as long as these laws are on the books, it's my belief that the police department should be enforcing them in order to preserve quality of life for our residents. If we don't think those laws should be on the books, then we should really have a conversation about that. But the beaches are as. As Councilman Saranga mentioned, we want to have access to the beaches. We want to have safe access to the beaches. We want to make the beaches a safe place for everyone to enjoy. I mean, he he spends a lot of his time outside of council working towards that mission. And so we want to make sure that we're doing what we can to make our beaches a place where everyone feels safe and well, where we're moving a ton of trash, much of it being from discarded property, from encampments. I think we need to think long term about the the focus of our cleanup efforts and making sure that we take it a step further. And and, you know, frankly, it's not just beaches. The item today is just beaches, but this conversation could be had about parks as well. It's a slippery slope when we start to turn a blind eye to encampments, because although we have policy considerations in mind here as a council in terms of what we're doing long term to address a very complex issue, the residents are looking outside their window and they're experiencing things when they're walking their children to school and they have expectations for what the government will and will not follow up on. And if we're going to have the laws on the books, we should be willing to enforce them. So thank you. Thank you, Councilman Mongo. I just want to add a small tidbit of information that I think that we're also very aware of is that sometimes the population that is most impacted by the encampment are those who have lived in encampments. And we've seen this through the Department of Public Health, clean cleanup, unrelated to the spread of Mersa, the spread of other things. And so and while it can be uncomfortable, we also want to take into consideration that oftentimes people who are down on their luck have the least amount of medical coverage and the least ability to protect themselves from certain types of. Different public health disasters that come about from encampments and or hoarding and or the different things that can happen when people are at different mental states or different times in their life. So I'm very supportive of the item and thank you for your work on this. But I do agree that it's not just about beaches, it's about beaches and parks and and even the flood control channels on our sidewalks and our communities and our alleys. So it's an all encompassing program. And thank you to Pete and the Hart team for all that you do. Thank you. Editor Public comment on this item. Seeing None members please go ahead and cast your votes. Motion carries. Thank you. We have one more item before we we have our hearing. We're going to go ahead and do the item 26, please.

Recommendation to authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary to amend Contract No. 34577 with Bitech Construction, Inc., of Buena Park, CA; Contract No. 34571 with Exbon Development, Inc., of Garden Grove, CA; Contract No. 34582 with Good-Men Roofing Construction, Inc., of San Diego, CA; Contract No. 34586 with Harry Joh Construction, Inc., of Paramount, CA; Contract No. 34578 with Thomasville Construction, Inc., of Fullerton, CA; and, Contract No. 34575 with Vincor Construction, Inc., of Brea, CA; for Job Order Contracting (JOC) services, to extend the contract terms for an additional one-year period through March 21, 2021, with an annual amount for each contract of $2,000,000 for a total annual aggregate amount not to exceed $12,000,000; and Authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute all documents necessary to amend Agreement No. 34736 with O’Connor Construction Management, Inc., of Irvine, CA, for as-needed JOC Program Support Services, to extend the contract term for two additional one-year periods through July 31, 2022. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_03242020_20-0260

Ocean carries. Thank you. Item number three, please. Madam Court, please be the item. Report from Public Works. Recommendation to execute all documents necessary to amend six contracts for job order contracting services to extend the contract terms for an additional one year period for a total annual aggregate amount not to exceed 12 million citywide. Motion. No. Okay. I have a count commissioned by Constable Manga and a second by Councilman Richardson. Without objection, we're going to go to a roll call vote. Madam Clerk. Council District one. I. Council District two. I. Council District three. I. Council District four. I. Council District five. I Council District six. Arts Council District seven. High Council. District eight. High Council District nine. All right. Motion carries. Okay. Thank you. That concludes the regular agenda items on the meeting. We're going to go right into closed session. And just from a what what's going to happen is this meeting will stay open. I'm still going to put it out at the end.

Recommendation to conduct a Budget Hearing to receive and discuss an Overview of the Proposed Fiscal Year 2015 Budget for Parks, Recreation and Marine, Library Services, and Code Enforcement.

LongBeachCC_08052014_14-0545

Item one Report from the City Manager Recommendation to conduct a budget hearing to receive and discuss an overview of of the proposed fiscal year 2015 budget for Parks, Recreation and Marine Library Services and Code Enforcement. Thank you. I want to introduce Mr. West. Mr. Mayor, council members, thank you very, very much. This is the next in a series of budget hearings that we're having to review the fiscal year 15 budget. Tonight, we're going to see a snapshot of the Parks and Recreation, Marine budget, library budget and the code enforcement budget. I just want to point out that while 70% of our entire budget goes to police and fire, showing the importance of public safety in this community, police and fire get a lot of assistance to the rest of some very, very critical functions in the city. We call it the public safety continuum. So these entities assist public safety fire PD throughout the entire community. These are things like neighborhood services, just keeping a good infrastructure up. The city prosecutor in all the great work he does, workforce development and the jobs that they provide for our youth, our homeless plan and other health services. Affordable housing, of course. And then again tonight, you'll see Parks Rec and Marine Library and Code Enforcement. And next week, you'll see the hard core of our public safety continuum, health, human services, combined with police and fire. So I'm going to turn it over first for our Parks Recreation Marine Director George Champion to provide that review. Thank you, George. Thank you, Mr. West, honorable mayor and members of the City Council. It's my pleasure to present to you the Department of Parks Recreation, Marine Fiscal Year 2015 Budget Fiscal Year 2014 has been incredibly successful and productive year for us and we look forward to what fiscal year 2015 holds. The 15 proposed budget provides the resources that not only help our city to be recognized as a national leader in parks and recreation services, but even more importantly, it provides us the opportunity to have a positive daily impact in the lives of the entire Long Beach community. As you know, the Department of Parks, Recreation, Marine is a large, dynamic operation, providing not only the more traditional parks, maintenance and recreation programing activities, but we are also responsible for our public marinas, six miles of beaches and our waterways and animal care services. The core services presented on the slide reflect the diversity of services offered to our Long Beach residents and visitors to provide for quality maintenance of parks, facilities, open spaces, beaches and marinas continue the implementation of the city's open space plan. Provide recreational opportunities to meet the diverse needs of the community, ensure the marinas are fiscally sound and meet the boat owners and community needs, and provide the public safety. Provide for public safety and the humane treatment of our animal population. As I previously mentioned, this fiscal year has been one of incredible achievement for our department. Earlier this fiscal year, we were once again recognized as a national leader in Parks and Recreation Management. The Gold Medal Award honors excellence in long range planning, environmental stewardship, quality staff, beautiful parks and innovative recreation programs. This is quite an accomplishment for the entire city team and could not have been done without the hard work and dedication of the department staff. Our Parks and Recreation Commission support from the city manager and support from the mayor and the City Council. We're also extremely proud of the recent investments that we've been able to make through the use of one time funds after many years of not having the resources to invest in our park amenities. This has been a welcome addition to our budget over the last few years and we can't thank the Council enough for your support. We don't have the time. We don't have enough time to go over all the projects as there were literally dozens in each council district. So we've listed just a few locations where these important investments have occurred. We reopen should it feel the spring, offering that community new athletic fields and a walking track in which to recreate. This past weekend, we opened the doors of the Park Community Center, which is a 3000 square foot, energy efficient building designed to accommodate afterschool programs, community meetings and events, and a digital training academy providing valuable technology job skills for our youth. This follows on the heels of major expansion and renovation at or Zarb a park. We've undertaken numerous improvements and a master planning effort, effort at Bixby Park. And I should point out that we're rolling out a new Park Patrol program at Bixby and Shattuck Field. There's the addition of a fitness zone at 14th Street Park, which gets tremendous use by the community and a new tot lot at Loma Vista Park. We have new dog parks at Coolidge Park and El Dorado Regional Park, bringing our total citywide to eight. The residents around Coolidge Park also benefit from a new basketball court and playground equipment, funded through a partnership with the Los Angeles Clippers. We've completed a number of projects at College Park, at State Park, including roof repairs and other amenity updates. There was roof repair and sports court recently resurfacing, and so Silverado Park building and fencing upgrades at Bixby Hills Park, completion of Basin five and the Alamo Bay Marina. And we're completing some critical upgrades to our park and street media and irrigation systems. Obviously, this is an extremely important project for us as we are working very hard to efficiently and effectively manage our water resources. I'll talk more about this later in the presentation. Our Animal Care Services operation has continued its success. It has continued its successes by reaching a 25 year low in Animal Pounds, resulting in our highest level library lease rates ever. And we want to leave you with one last accomplishment, which we believe tells an important story about the quality of our services. The demand for park programing is soaring. Visits to our senior centers are expected to surpass 400,000 this year, up from 300,000 just a few years ago. After school and summer programing, participation is booming at a number of our parks. In fact, Whaley Park's summer day camp is so popular that parents actually camp out to get their kids registered. This popularity is mirrored at other locations, including Water Park and at our Aquatics Day camps. We're having another successful summer with our Be Safe program, expecting over 50,000 participants in our ten week extended hours program. This is up from 40,000 last year. We're expecting close to a quarter of a million participants in our department's youth and adult sports programs. This is on top of the 10,000 participant participants in Long Beach has organized athletic leagues to call our fields home. 30,000 people are taking advantage of our contract class offerings, partaking in such lifelong learning activities as learning a new language or musical instrument, photography and arts and crafts provided by private instructors. This is an extension of the services that we offer, which serves not only as an economic driver for the small business community, but also an important revenue stream for us. And well over 100,000 people have experienced a municipal bank concert or movie in the park this summer. I should point out that our first movie premiered at Wellesley Park early this summer and had approximately 1800 people singing along with the characters in the Disney movie Frozen. These are truly staggering numbers, and they say a lot about the quality of programing that we offer our community. Often overlooked, however, is that many of our programs hire youth from our community. These programs serve as an important first job for many of our local kids. We take this employment responsibility very seriously and are proud to be the first stop on what is hopefully a long and successful career for these kids. We're able to provide these services with the annual budget that you prove each year for fiscal year 15. Our proposed budget totals just over 54 million across all funds, with 30 million coming from the general fund, while the majority of operations are supported by the general fund. We also have a large, very large tidelands maintenance and programing operation, and these include our three municipal marinas, six miles of beaches and waterways and other maintenance efforts in the Rainbow Harbor. I'd also like to point out that the department is working hard to identify other outside funding streams to help sustain our park system. In fact, since 2000, the Department has received well over 80 million in grant funds to improve our services throughout the city. These are outside dollars coming into Long Beach and helping to employ Long Beach residents. The 515 budget provides for just under 450 full time equivalent positions, which, during our busy summer months grows to over 800 part time staff who help run the POPPEA programs we offer. Again, these part time staff are mostly young Long Beach residents. The department is extremely pleased with the continued investment identified in the proposed budget. There's 2.4 or 5 million identified for replacing the irrigation system at Hartwell Park. At two, there's 2.5 million. Identify 2 million of that is for the irrigation system. 450,000 of that is for our water budget, which we haven't been able to keep up with over the years. We've seen a 40% increase in water rates over the past seven years. So this will help us at least come back to that level. These and these investments will help us address two of the most critical needs in our park irrigation system. Hartwell Park is home to our largest remaining manually operated irrigation system. What this means is that staff has to first go out and physically install an irrigation head where they want to water, then manually turn on the water and return 10 minutes later to move the irrigation it to the next area that needs to be watered. Using this antiquated system, it takes a full week. Monday through Friday from 6:30 a.m. to 2:30 p.m. to manually water the entire length of Hartwell Park, which measures well over one mile long. This investment will allow us to modernize our infrastructure by moving to an electronically controlled irrigation system, which will allow us to remotely manage the system and therefore will significantly reduce staff time expended. It will enable us more efficient application of our limited water resource, which could result in over 3 million gallons of water saved annually and allow us to better meet the watering restrictions, time frame and irrigation irrigate during times that the park is not in use. Once again, these are critical needs for us. In another investment that will help reduce millions of gallons of water in the future. There is 1.369 million identified for the completion of a synthetic turf field at Admiral Kip Park. The installation costs for synthetic fields have come back higher than expected. So this investment will get us a third field, including those at Seaside Park and Eldorado Park. Additionally, it's our hope that by working with partners like the Metropolitan Water District and local sports leagues, we can get a fourth field completed. The migration to synthetic turf fields will not only reduce our water consumption, but will also help address the growing demand for use of our fields. The proposed budget also includes 287,000 for ongoing maintenance and operation costs for medians, parkways and parks. It's important to note that this is not for new parks, but rather to fund the maintenance needs, such as custodial supplies and ground maintenance at parks that have been added or upgraded over the past few years. Examples of these parks include Chick Baker or Zebra and Crescent Parks, just to name a few. And lastly, we're reorganizing the Animal Care Services Bureau to provide for improved management and service delivery. This will help to address supervision in a bureau which has grown significantly over the last five years, while also providing a better ladder for staff making a career with us. This reorganization is both budget and fee neutral. One of the ongoing challenges is meeting the community's expectations for safe, quality athletic fields in fiscal year 15. We'll continue to work with industry professionals and our user groups to identify a more sustainable maintenance model for these fields. We've had great success partnering with a number of athletic leagues, and we'll look to further develop those relationships with budgets as tight as ever. Department continues to identify new opportunities to provide our services as efficiently and effectively as possible. One such opportunity is through investment in technology from our new cloud based contract, class registration and facility reservation systems to offering free public Wi-Fi in 18 parks to an upgraded maintenance work order management system to our Animal Care Services mobile app. We see how technology can help us reduce costs, improve service, and better connect with the community we serve. And with that said, we'll continue to explore any and all future opportunities to invest in technology. In fact, we just recently opened another Go Long Beach app where people can actually call us whenever they see a sprinkler running or broken head so that we can get out there and fix quickly. Mr. Mayor, member of the City Council, we have a large park system with over 160 parks, 3000 acres, 26 community centers, dozens of athletic fields, three public marinas, 67 tennis courts, five municipal golf courses, 54 playgrounds, three pools and an animal shelter. Our opportunities are many. Your continued investment in these community assets has been essential to our ability to meet the needs of the community. We thank you for your continued support, and that concludes my presentation. Thank you. We're going to go thinking, Mr. Chapman. We're going to actually do a library services, then code enforcement and open it up for questions from council and comment. So we've got the library services. Glenda Williams, our library director. You have. Good afternoon, Honorable Mayor Garcia and members of City Council. Thank you for this opportunity to speak to the 515 proposed budget for the Department of Library Services. Founded in 1896, our Department continues to provide our community with resources to meet their information needs and improve the quality of life. We partner with other city departments as part of the public safety continuum. According to our police department, public safety has three prongs prevention, intervention and suppression. The library assists with prevention. Many studies have shown that there is a correlation between literacy and crime. 85% of youth in juvenile hall cannot read above a third grade level. And here's another sobering statistic. Two thirds of the children that can't read by the fourth grade will either go to jail or be on welfare. This results in a definite impact on our cities and our communities resources. But the good news is that there is a correlation between literacy, the availability of books and reading aloud to children. According to the RAND Corporation, children who are read to and visit the library have significantly higher reading and math scores in school. The statistics for adults are also sobering. Studies show that 60% of inmates are illiterate. That's 60% once they have served their time and are released. There is a 70% chance they will return to prison if they remain illiterate and the cycle continues. But that percentage drops to 16% if they become illiterate. A small investment in literacy through library resources can yield huge results and help keep our city safe. Okay. So now on to our core services. The library has print media and online resources on a huge variety of topics. We have something for everybody, and since we're a public library, everybody is welcome. We have 12 libraries located throughout the city for convenient access to resources. There is no charge to attend. Library programs are used for resources. It's free. We provide lifelong learning, reading and enrichment, top of opportunities for our community, for our little ones. It's very important that they are ready for kindergarten. We have resources and programs for children to increase their vocabulary and get them off to a good start. The programs also provide in an environment where young children learn to interact with each other. The family learning centers at our libraries also support learning. They provide drop in one on one homework assistance with books and reliable online resources for our children. It's hard for some people to believe this, but not everything on the Internet is true. In addition, we have our summer reading club every year for all ages. Families enjoy the free programs, including magic shows, petting zoos and performances by groups like Musical Theater West and building Lego models and so on. And they earn prizes as they read. While this is a lot of fun, it also serves an important role to keep children reading in the summer and prevent the summer slide. The result is that they will be ready to learn when school begins again and some students will even advance their reading skills. And to borrow from our own police chief, McDonnell. I hope he doesn't mind. Reading and reading comprehension is a force multiplier for success in school, which leads to success in advanced education, whether college or vocational, which also leads to better paying jobs. And in our rapidly changing world, a college degree is equated to a high school diploma these days. So whether you want to know about local Long Beach history, gardening in small spaces, starting a business and not learning another language or refresh your computer skills, you'll find it at the Long Beach Public Library. We're perfectly positioned to support our community with lifelong learning opportunities and help them meet their goals. And of course, we strive to provide library services in an efficient manner by using library technology to select, organize and deliver information to our residents. We have automated many of our manual tasks and processes to save the time of library use and those with maximum benefit. For our accomplishments for FY 14, almost 80,000 e-books and audiobooks have been downloaded to smartphones, tablets, computers or e-readers. From our website at npr.org. And a few months ago, we also added online interactive magazines. Popular titles include Arbonne, Car and Driver, Esquire House, Beautiful, Macworld and the Nation. It's just like the print magazine, except that many people can read the same magazine at the same time but go. Long Beach Public Library Mobile app allows people to manage their library accounts, request materials and stay up to date on newest books at the library from the device of their choice. Usage has increased about 38,000 searches a month. Our 12 libraries are heavily use with more than one 2 million visits for FY14. That equals about 5000 people a day walking into our facilities. We're estimating that more than 6.8 million resources will be used in access for this fiscal year. The breakdown is from items checked out, items used on site, online database searches, computer sessions and website usage. For example, we had more than 1.3 million items checked out for this past fiscal year. We also have very successful community partnerships with the Long Beach Unified School District. Teachers bring the students to their local library to see what programs and resources the library has available to offer and also help with homework and reading assignments. And as I mentioned earlier, our annual summer reading club is very successful. During the last seven weeks, libraries hosted more than 70 presenters with a wide variety of programs. We had record participation this year. 5000 people signed up and read more than 15,000 books, which is another record for us. Beach Animals Reading with Kids. Our Bark is a great program to rotate through most of our branches and is a big hit with the kids. The dogs are great listeners. They're non-judgmental. They don't frown or make a noise if a word is misread. It really helps the kid increase in their confidence. And attendance is very high. All bark programs, capital improvements for our branches include repair of roofs. Dana and bark libraries have resurfaced. Parking lots, bathrooms have been upgraded, and community rooms are in the process of a process of being painted and recrafted. We're also receiving new chairs and tables. We received the California Reads Grant to explore important topics through books that invite community conversation, and this year's programs will focus on veterans returning home from war. So stay tuned for that. Our Early Learning and Families grant provided research based training for librarians along with tools, tools and supplies to enhance programs in all 12 of our locations. The grant also provided an enhancement to our children's areas. Lastly, we opened a makerspace called the studio in April at the main library and a makerspace is a place where people have access to resources and technology to learn, create and collaborate and a shared space. Available equipment includes a 3D printer, computers with video and editing software, tablets and so on. Our monthly monthly programing includes 3D printing, the basics of Photoshop, and how to download e-books and audible audiobooks on device of your choice. And then there's origami. One on one. We also have special programs last month with a scratch coding class for girls. And this month we will feature Music Technology Workshop. Again, workshops are all free to the public, but you must RV RSVP for limited spacing and more information is available on our website. And in addition, we have digital cameras, a greenscreen lighting and editing equipment available through a partnership with the Long Beach Public Access Digital Network at the main library. For our proposed budget for this year. The General Fund and supplies 95 sorry 96% of funding for library operations. And that's about $12.2 million. 3% is funded by general grants, which is mainly funding that comes from the Library Foundation for their family learning centers. And the remaining 150,000 is funding for the staff at this resource desk and City Hall. Proposed changes for FY 15 budget includes strategic investments for two important projects. We're really excited to see the new North Library moving forward. 2.1 million is needed to complete the funding for the library, which will be more than 24,000 square feet, includes three community meeting rooms and resources and programs for all ages. The current North Library is just under 7000 square feet and was built in 1951 to serve a population of 25,000. I'd say the community has quadrupled since that time to more than 100,000 people. The next item is to upgrade the communication infrastructure by obtaining VoIP phones. That's voice over Internet protocol, like the ones in City Hall. Current phones are more than 20 years old, and technology services is a challenge to even find replacement parts as they continually need repairs at the ten locations. There is a continued demand from Long Beach residents for access to computers and the Internet in the library and even beyond this basic need. People want to access the most recent operating systems and computer updates so they can maximize their computing experience. Using computers and technology is now a way of life for most people. We're excited to partner with our Technology Services Department to pilot virtualized public computers. What this means is that the software and applications for many computers can be run from one device. For example, one computer would be the server of the brain for 40 workstations. This would save staff staff time because updates can be deployed just on the server and would update on all the 40 workstations without having to touch and configure each one. As a result, equipment and maintenance costs would be reduced. Energy usage would decrease by 40%, since bulky public computers would no longer be needed and e-waste will be reduced as a result. As a result as well. We look forward to the pilot for a 515 for this efficient solution to meet the demand for computing services at the library. I thank you for your time. That concludes my report. Thank you so much. And finally, we have code enforcement. Making this presentation will be Lee Rocha, our code enforcement officer, as well as Angela Reynolds, our deputy director for developing services. Mr. Mayor, members of the city council, thank you very much. I'm going to let Angela and Lee take over. Code enforcement is an integral part of the Development Services Department, and it is only appropriate to have Leon Angela do this presentation. They are the experts in this topic. So I'm going to hand it over to Angela. Thank you. Thank you, Amy. And good evening, mayor and council members. We're going to talk about code enforcement this evening for 515 and we'll start with core services. We were good. Okay. Here we go. We code enforcement response to referrals to ensure compliance with the Long Beach Municipal Code, which is particularly Title 21. So we deal with zoning infractions. Title 18 that's the building code for the most part, and title nine for nuisance type properties. And we meet monthly to collaborate with fire police business licensed city attorney, city prosecutor and nuisance abatement to solve problematic and nuisance activities. So as I said, we do that monthly if we need to meet more often, we certainly do. But those are standing meetings where staff from all of those departments come together and we call them quad meetings, even though there's only three of them now. And we talk about some of the top priority nuisance or problem properties throughout the city and try to target those properties and put together kind of a roadmap where all our services come together to get some compliance there. And at Council's recommendation last year, we implemented a foreclosure registry due to the high rates of foreclosures throughout the city and neighborhood problems that may have resulted from them. And we also staff the Board of Examiners Appeals and Condemnations Board, and that is a board that here is primarily code enforcement and building bureau issues. And since 2008, code enforcement issued started to issue administrative citations for code violations. And we do that. We we work with folks and try to get them into compliance. But if they're just lingering and they are not coming into compliance, we can actually issue an administrative citation of $100. Kidding. Okay. So as I said, we instituted that administrative citation in 2008. And prior to that, we really had no effective I don't want to say Hammer, but we had no effective way to actually get people to come into compliance. And so we were carrying about a 7000 case back load backlog for the year and just continue to roll over for these folks that didn't come into compliance. So that administrative citation has been very, very helpful. As you can see from the first bullet code now handles about 10,000 code enforcement cases a year, of which 91% are closed within 180 days of initiation. So there is very little backlog. Sorry. Hundred and 20 days. Also, code enforcement inspected 80 properties for possible illegal garage conversions to dwelling units and issued approximately 44 citations. And that is just in the last fiscal year, we started to do that as in 2007, because of the Avila family tragedy that you may have heard about. These illegal units that people are occupying are certainly a roof over their head. But it's it's a dangerous one. So there's health and safety issues. Typically, there are aren't adequate exits, the wiring is faulty and so forth. So we're very that's a very high priority for the last council, and I hope it will be for this one as well. And we processed 956 registrations of residential properties in the foreclosure process, as I alluded to earlier, and collected $170,000 in registration fees. Those fees are $160 every time a lender files a notice of determination. So that's a first step in the foreclosure process. And what we do with that is we send a code enforcement officer out to that property to assess if there are any code violations. And if there are, we work with the either the lender or the owner to bring them into compliance. So they're not a blight on the neighborhood. We have three funding sources currently for code enforcement, community development block grant funding, which is federal funding, is a little bit over $1,000,000 development services money of 1.8, and that is from the multifamily habitability proactive inspection program that we just absorbed in 2014. And then three and a half million dollars in general fund. So some of our actual opportunities are that we're hoping to realize in FY15 are all about the mobile handheld devices. That's like an iPad type of device that all of our inspectors will be able to take out into the field with them. And it remote's back into our land management system. So it helps with efficiencies for mapping inspection routes so we don't go out of our way when we're going out electronically, document violations and conditions, which means we can create a case in the field real time, take pictures and notes in the field and have them recorded directly into that land management system I was referring to. And we can research the properties, history and verify whether work is properly permitted. So the efficiency there is that this happens out in the field one time. Currently we have to write it all down in the field. And then we then our our staff comes back into the office and has to record it in the land management system. So this is a one time real time efficiency for us and one of our significant issues continues to be that of safety. A few years ago, one of our code enforcement principal building inspectors was actually shot and permanently wounded. He's back to work, thankfully, but he was it was very problematic for everyone. So currently going forward, what we do is we work very, very closely with the police department to accompany us on these significant compliance case types. And so the last slide is one that just tells you all the opportunities that folks have to see what we're doing in code enforcement. So there's multiple ways to contact code enforcement. The first and most popular one is to just call five seven no code, which is 26335702633. And it's important to note that all referrals are anonymous and we take that very seriously and they remain anonymous. Another way to do it online is do a simple Google search of Long Beach code enforcement, and if you do that, it'll all nine council districts will pop up and you can go by council district, click on that and find out what all the open cases are and what the violations are on that particular property. And then we have the dynamic portal, which is at WW W Law DOT will be code.org. This allows the public to actually give us. Referrals. Online and it also tracks all code enforcement activity that has happened on that particular property, at least for the last ten years. So that's opened and closed cases. And that concludes my my report. AQ And with that, unless there's anything else. Mr. West We're done. Okay, thank you and thank you all for the great presentation. Three very good presentations. I'm going to turn this back to the City Council for some questions or comments and then open it up to the public. Katzenberg O'Donnell. Yes. Thank you. Just a couple questions. Three great presentations by three great departments working hard with regard to the Parks and Rec. You guys do a wonderful job. I always say about Parks and Rec, some people have a job, some people have a career, they have a vocation. They truly care about what they do. And I see it, you know, in my own family, with my own kids attending the parks and some of the summer activities. So I think you guys are wonderful. You get nothing but support from me. And I should take this moment to encourage the other council members annually, perhaps this year as well. We'll see. Money comes up that we label infrastructure money and typically we put it into. Streets and sidewalks. We have some. Available for parks. Too, or you have a choice to put it in the parks, and you should really look to put it in as some of the park facilities too, because those matter. You know, the fourth district, we've just finished a major rehabilitation of Whaley Park. We're not done. There's more to do, but it's looking good out there. It's top notch. Hadn't been touched probably 40 years. Stearns as well. And now we're on to the nature center. But, you know, don't just think this is you know, when we talk infrastructure. It's only streets and sidewalks. You know, you talk about we talked about force multiplier earlier that, you know, the same thing is true with our, you know, our infrastructure in our parks. And you might not always get the biggest awards for it and you might not get, you know, the greatest accolades because, yeah, it's, you know, it's, you know, a good distance away from your neighborhood. And maybe it is isn't always the people in your district that use that park. But it is important to our city. It is important to keep our kids busy during those Gordon Golden hours. So please look at that. With regard to Mr. Chaplin, just a couple of questions with regard. You talked about some upgrades for the irrigation system and we have some money set aside as at one time money for that. We had about 1.1 million set aside from last year. Okay, great. So what I would ask you to do is. Reach out to the water department and ask them to participate in that, because certainly there is a nexus between the water department and the expenditures that would go into the system. And they should you know, I would think they'd want to participate because this helps them as well. So I wouldn't want this burden all to fall on the city. We have precedents for this when we're talking about some of the replacement of the soccer fields with some of the synthetic turf. And if you want to comment on that tour, Councilman, we do have a relationship with the water department. We've used some controllers, electronic controllers that they've given us haven't quite matched our system. They're a little bit difficult to work with, but we have used them. Some of the rebates that they've offered don't really apply to some of the like, sprinkler heads. We don't use the kind of sprinkler heads that they they're giving rebates on. So but we are looking for opportunities with them. They are helping us with the MWD grant for the artificial fields. I think there's a three $53.50 cent rebate on each square foot of artificial fields. So we should be able to get some money from the Metropolitan Water District for their help. Great. And I'm not just asking for the Metropolitan Water District money. I think that's great. But I'm asking that department to participate as well. If you could maybe give me some feedback as to the specifics with regard to the sprinkler head issue that that should be, I would think, easily fixable so we can move forward together. It shouldn't be just on us, nor should it be on them, but it should be a partnership to save water and make us more efficient . So let me be a partner with you and making sure that they respond to this issue, because I think it's a big deal. It's absolutely a big deal. We don't want them just to be a pass through the MWD. I think that's great that MWD is doing that. Vice Mayor But I mean, the water department in of itself should be waking up to the fact that they need to be a partner. The port is a partner with the city. The water department should be a partner with the city as well. So thank you. Thank you. And I think we should also look to developing some. Policy with regard to new parks so that we can. Make them the capital improvements. They're more along the lines of the landscaping as efficient, water wise as possible and maintenance, because it's not just water, it's also maintenance. You know, we shouldn't be having you know, right now, I don't know that we have the money to open parks with lots of grass because that takes dollars, certainly to maintain the grass cut. It might, you know, keep it alive. But on the with the fertilizer but also the water side. So I don't know if we need to develop. Some policy with that because I know every new councilmember. Wants a new park. I was one was yeah, I was there. I get it. But you know, the fact of the matter is, as we keep adding on your department duties and we keep, you know, we and your budget, quite frankly, is shrunken on a per capita basis. And so, you know, I don't know if we need to look at policy with regard to that. So we kind of rain some thoughts in here, but maybe we should do that. I don't want to rain anyone's parade, but at the same time, we you know, new parks are great. But remember, every time you add a new park and you're not paying, you know, you know, you don't have an adequate dodge. The parks you have you have to look at what you're doing. And and also when we you know, we talk about fields, whatever we can do to support the sports fields, that's baseball fields. Soccer fields in particular. You know, I'm big on that. I'm going to be talking to these two beside me about what we do because we have some issues on the east side, actually across the city with regards to our sports fields. We need to do we need to do something different there on how we maintain them and how we keep them user friendly because the parents are concerned. My own kids play on those fields, so I bring my own experience and it's not easy. I get it. It's not easy because our numbers of users are only growing. Yeah. And they're used all the time. So we need to look at some, you know, I talked about over in North Eldorado Park, some type of permanent maybe some permanent opportunity. And we'll be talking about that. And how do we fund that? I don't know. And I don't want to just want to throw stuff on that we can't fund. But again, that would have to be synthetic, minimal costs, etc.. So with that, I just thank you and thank the library as well. And I turn it back to you. Mr.. Thank you, Councilmember. Mongo. I first want to thank the department heads who did an excellent job in pre briefing and then going through the details of ensuring that we knew every single item of this agenda during this time of drought. It is just of the utmost importance that we continue to invest in opportunities. The. Hartwell Park Project, from what I understand, could save up to 3.9 million gallons of water a year. And that's striking. It's both good for our ongoing budget. It's important for us to maintain these fields, for us to find better times, to water them so there's more opportunity for kids to play, especially during the summer. So thank you very much for putting that forth. And I want to continue to encourage investment in one time expenditures that save us ongoing revenue. So thank you. With the libraries, I'm ecstatic about the partnerships that you've made with nonprofit organizations to extend the resources you have. Congratulations and great work and we look forward to more of that and code enforcement. Thank you for keeping our communities clean and safe. Thank you. Katzenberg. Richardson. Thank you. Let's see, we've got parks up here, so I'll. I'll comment on Parks. So I think we've. You nailed it. We've done some amazing things these last few years with the one time infrastructure funds. I'm really excited to keep that going. But I want to I want to chime in quickly about the the maintenance. I know we switched maintenance contractors and then switched back and now we have an appropriation of 287 K of an increase to for our median maintenance. So can you just walk us through where we are since since the last time we had that debacle with the last contractor and now we have as taking are we keeping pace with the maintenance of our medians and our parks? Councilmember I believe we are keeping pace. The current contractors are much better than than the the work that was done by the previous contractor. The 275,000 is really unrelated to that. These are four fields of electric field is two new fields that were added that we didn't have money for. So this helps to help maintain those additional fields. A lot of that goes to check because Trillick is four fields total, whereas before we weren't maintaining it at the level that we need to maintain it. Right now, we want to make sure that we can keep that green and usable for the community, which also means not playing in all the fields, rotating more, more aerating, more watering there, just so that it doesn't end up being a dust bowl again. Thank you. And and maybe you can just chime in on the the Force Wetlands Project. I know it should be breaking ground in this next fiscal year, and I'm not quite sure if the project's going to be completed in the next fiscal year, if we should talk about the maintenance associated with that. But can you just chime in briefly about the the forced wetlands restoration? Well, I believe we should be going out the bit soon. We're working with public works to go out to bid soon. So when that is done, it's a lot of natural vegetation. It should be low maintenance. So it's not like a typical park where you have fields to maintain. It'll be in natural vegetation, so it would be low maintenance. So of course we'll still have to go through there, still do cleanups, that sort of thing. But that's in the contract. We should be able to do it. Great. And lastly, congratulations on your success with the Be Safe program. It's it's been great at Highland Park. I know it's in a number of districts here, but I'd like to ask if there's a plan in this budget to continue that going in the next fiscal year? Councilmember These are one time funds. They're really we're really dependent on more one time funds in the future. It's not part of our structural budget. We just couldn't increase our structural budget at this point. So we love the program. It's great. It serves a lot of kids, keeps kids off the street, keeps them out of trouble. It's a wonderful program, as you all know, but it's just not part of the structural budget. And just just to be clear, this is a I truly support the program, but this is really something, you know, council member Austin Aneel initially tried to champion and I'd just like to see that because I'm not sure that we have flexibility in the upcoming one times to support these sorts of programs, should council members want to support them. So I'd like to entertain that conversation when we get back to the capital budget on limiting some on limiting some of the flexibility on the street and sidewalk money or perhaps carving out additional funds to support programs like this. Because this is the second year we've done the Be Safe program. The results have been outstanding. It's you know, we see thousands of kids in the park. The lights are on, it's productive. And it really brings a positive synergy to the park that I really don't want to lose. So that's what that's what I had for, for Parks and Rec. I just wanted to chat with code enforcement, with neighborhood services briefly. Thank you. So I'm pretty sure you guys know what I'm going to ask about instead of that foreclosure registry program. I was delighted to see that you tracked what the progress was, how much it generated, because that was my first question, how much that it generated this year. I believe it was 100 and 770,000 and registration fees this year. So the first question I have is, have we I know that we haven't had the need to actually fine a bank for not maintaining a property. Last we checked, has that changed? Have we assessed that $1,000 a day fine yet to a bank? No. Well, Councilman LaRocca, the expert, says, no, we haven't had to do that. They've come into compliance. Great. That's great news. The fact that by registering, keeping track of these of these foreclosed, vacant, foreclosed properties, we can sort of we haven't had to actually find a single bank for its maintenance. I think that's outstanding. The next question I have is how does this 170,000 registration fees? How does that compare to last year and the year before? Because we began collecting fees about two years ago, I believe. Well, I can't give you the exact statistics, Councilman, other than to say it's going down. So the foreclosures, we know by tracking them that they're actually going down in the city of Long Beach. Great. And has have these additional. So it's going down, I would imagine, because the foreclosure rate is going down. We started right at the peak. We can get you that information over the I think it's been in effect for at least three years and I can provide that information. Good. Yeah, that'd be interesting to find out. And then I'd like to just chime in on the facade, the CDBG facade program. I'm not sure if it would be appropriate here under code enforcement or wind development services comes. It's really not a code enforcement issue. Okay. Great. Well, thank you. It's a lot of. Thank you, Councilmember. Councilman Gonzalez. Thank you. Thank you for the presentations. I'll start with code enforcement. Just have a few questions. How many inspectors do we currently have? I just want to make sure I'm getting a good frame of reference. We have boots on the ground. Inspectors about 28. 28. Okay. And has there any I know in the past there may have been discussion for code enforcement on the weekends. Has there been anything? I know it's not in the proposal, but. Yes, we are actually looking at what the city of Los Angeles is doing in a little bit of a different capacity. They are offering building inspection services on one Saturday a month. We are going to be contemplating whether we have the ability to provide code enforcement activities on weekends or through a hotline. That's something that we'll be working on in this fiscal year to see if that's something that we can accomplish. We understand that there is a need. We do see that there are a lot of code enforcement violations that tend to occur on weekends, particularly within our historic districts and in the downtown. So we're aware of that need. Great. Thank you. And then just moving over to library services. Thank you. Just had a quick question on library services. I think it's great digitizing the books. It's wonderful we don't have a library in the first District. So access in that capacity is wonderful. But what is the the focus on veterans exactly. Can you just brief on that a little bit? Yes. I have Darla Wagner coming up here for main labor. And she's been working with the veterans services on how to answer. Hello. We received a California reads grant from Cal Humanities for a program called War Comes Home. And it has a focus on a on reaching out to our community veterans, as well as the community itself to help with educating and informing about how to transition our veterans back into our communities. So we will be looking at having different types of programing, including a film festival where we focus on documentaries and feature films about that process, as well as having a panel come and talk to the community about that, what they went through when they came home from either Afghanistan or some other war experience. We are trying to get maybe an author to come in. We weren't lucky enough to get the author that they're focusing on, but he will be nearby and we will be asking people to read his book and and learn a bit. He wrote a book called What It's Like to Go to War. And his name is Karl Marlantes. So we'll be looking at a lot of different other programs and working with our local veterans collaborative here in Long Beach with Patty Laplace and and another number of other organizations here to to do a full program that we can feature our veterans as well as learn about our veterans. Thank you, darling. You're welcome. And then just moving on quickly. I know for sake of time to parks, I'm really glad to hear about the park maintenance specifically with Seaside Chavez, Drake Park. We tend to have issues constantly with safety, of course, and then also maintenance. So upkeep with cleaning, trash, landscaping and also bathrooms is certainly key for us. But question about the update and technology, I know that there had been issues in the past with revenue collection. Is that incorporated in that update for technology or councilwoman? Yes, absolutely it is. It is. Okay, great. And then what is the Long Beach up? I know you had it's an enhanced application for parks now, which is great. So in addition to sprinklers or anything else, what else does it include? Well, this is new for us. Sprinklers. Any any time you see runoff water or things in the park that catches your eye. If the sprinklers broke in or there's a main break, call it. You just take a photo of it and it sends us the notice right away and we'll get staff out there to shut that off and fix it right away. So it really helps us in our water management system. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember. Thank you. And I want to have Parks Rec and Marine. I just want to start with you and express my appreciation to the department staff, the commitment of everybody in the department, to making sure that our parks are well programed in the top quality. Councilmember Richardson mentioned maintenance issues that we have, particularly in North Long Beach parks, oh, last year. I want to commend the department for the rebound in the contractor. Things are looking a lot better in all of our parks up there, particularly in my district. To Councilmember O'Donnell's point. I do think I am one of those newer council members. And yes, I do want to get more green space in my district because it's park poor. Actually, we have opportunity to do that and we're going to take advantage of it. But in planning with the community, we're going to be very mindful of our responsibility to be good environmental citizens and conservation, conserve as much as possible. And to that end, I do like the idea of us moving toward artificial turf, particularly in athletic fields. We plan to do that, particularly, hopefully at Davenport Park, where we'll be having a community planning process on August 16th. I wanted to make that little plug in there. The BCA program, I do think it merits our attention as a city council to discuss, you know, two years to summer straight of success with that program. It was a little controversial and there was some of the readiness of this. But behind the rail here to move forward with one time plans to do that. But I think it has paid huge dividends for for our community. You know, I think we talked about investing in our youth and investing in quality neighborhoods. I think it certainly has made a big difference over the last couple of years. And so I certainly Councilmember Richardson would entertain ongoing discussion as we move forward in the budget process to carve out monies to ensure that we can at least continue to do that. If it's a one time ongoing, one with the one time ongoing, however we want to call it, we need to fund and invest in our youth. I guess my my question for for Parks Rec and Marine regarding the the the ongoing maintenance cost, you know, I think you he broke broke it down. I think it's up over $200,000 for new new expenditures for for new medians and parks. How much of that is actually going to the parks? I'm sorry, Councilman. For maintenance. All of it all of all of it is needed for the park upgrades and some of the newer parks that were built. Can you tell us like what type of maintenance needs are we going to be paying for? Well, you know, Baker, many Park, Chaddock and some of the other newer parks, we've had to absorb maintenance from our own budget, which meant taking away from things like gopher control and some of the other important field maintenance items. So this will help offset those those costs that we've actually shifted from other parts of our budget to help us maintain these parks. But again, the majority of it is traffic field and it is a specialized field that needs to again stay green and playable because of the soil conditions over there. It's a catch basin or detention basin. So we need to make sure the soil is in proper condition. We need to aerate more often than we do in normal fields and probably seed a little bit more often. So those are the type of things that that are involved in the maintenance. So looking back in, you know, I was involved in the planning aquatic field, but I mean, what would have what would it whatever that whatever what would it have cost us to make that a turf field? Probably each field would have been an additional $500,000. So 2 million more maybe. But we looked at that option and it really wasn't a viable option because of the fact that it's a catch basin, flood basin. The material would have lifted right off it. The investment would have been it would have been a bad investment from the beginning. So we looked at that. We really did want to make that a synthetic turf field throughout the entire complex there, but we just couldn't do it. Okay. Thank you very much. I did have a question for for Glenda. Just a quick one. Library services. Hello there. Well. Thank you. And I want to just just commend you and your department. And you guys have done a great, great job. I do agree with the definition of this budget presentation of public safety continuum, because our parks certainly provide safe haven for people to risk to recreation, as well as our libraries. And libraries are a cool place right now in the hot summer. So and obviously the services are fantastic. I did want to just just go on record to find out exactly when we expect to break ground on the new North Library. Tough question. That is an excellent question. I did not have an exact date for late September. Okay. So we're looking at late, late September. Okay. And then the second piece is, when do we expect to to to open the doors after we break ground? 18 months. 18 months. Okay. So that would be an FBI. 17, 16. 16. Okay. And I know the last couple of budget cycles we've actually appropriated what we need to appropriate to openness. This new North library and one times as well as a midyear adjustment is the $2.1 million going to get us what we need and finally put the put that the rest. Yeah. Yes. Okay. And I guess for the benefit of the public, what are what are we looking to to purchase with the $2.1 million in one time resources that we are expanding this time? Counselor, I'll answer that. The $2.1 million will do all of the infrastructure work around the library, parking lot, utility work. Take care of the. A cell phone tower that's on the building that was on the building. So basically it just wraps everything around the library. We have the library bid that was a that will be awarded shortly by the city council that came in under budget. But we still have some infrastructure work around the library, utility work, cell phone tower, things like that. So that that those resources won't go to buying purchasing books and equipment and put furniture inside the library. No, last year in last year's budget, this year's budget actually includes one time dollars that the city council approved and appropriated last year that will take care of fixtures and equipment and books. And we do still have our library foundation who will also be working with us to assist, correct? Absolutely. They're wonderful every year. They provide X amount of dollars for books and other improvements. Thank you very much. Okay. Thank you. Got some more? Yes, thank you. I mean, thank you, Mayor. Things are moving fast when you be a long time. What I'd really like to say, I want to hurry up because I know you individuals are trying to get home and go to get to dinner. But what I'm just wanting to just say is that all three departments, you know, Parks and Rec and Public Safety and Library, I just like to just send out kudos because the fact that you guys have done such a great job, and especially in my district, I think any of you individuals who have not had a chance to come over and see Cherry Field, you will see the management of how things have been done, come up and take a look at who used to be Hamilton Bowl. The Dust Bowl now is chilling. Feel Taj Mahal just come up and take a look. So I want to thank all you individuals, you department heads. Thank you for everything. Now you guys can go home and get something to eat. And thank you, Councilmember Vice Mayor Lowenthal. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I just had a couple of questions for Parks, Recreation and Marine Park. And as they're getting back to their seats, I wanted to just thank the departments that came here for their presentation as well as all the discussion we've had. Mr. City Manager As you know, a couple of us have received a request from neighborhood leaders in the second and third district. Councilmember Price and I have to reestablish a citywide Parks Ranger Park Ranger program. And you're aware of this. This is for our parks, and I truly appreciate the dynamics behind the request and believe it's worthy of council discussion, especially since the request is for a citywide reinstitution of this program. But I think it'd be beneficial for this Council, as we are today, to receive background information on the Ranger program before entertaining a position on that matter. Some of us have context from a certain time period and some of us have context from another time period. I think it would be a good point in time to have the full context of that program and what it would cost. So I would like to request the following information to be reported back to the Council and the Budget Oversight Committee at its first August 19th meeting. One would be the loaded costs, certainly, which for members of the public would include recruitment, training, equipment, salary and benefits. The full cost, not just the hourly cost of a ranger. I don't think that gives us an idea of what it would cost. And this would be for the Citywide Park Ranger program at full strength and a program whereby a city wide ranger program would only cover maybe the hotspots. We should have some options to look at. Certainly, if this is something that we would entertain what it would cost for a citywide program or what it used to cost before each of us in our districts have hotspots. I certainly know which are the ones in the Second District, other council members, we all have them. No matter where the district is in which part of the city it is, we have them. So perhaps what Parks Rec and Marine can do is use the data such as calls for service and make their recommendations or even connect with councilmembers and have them refer what they're known. Hotspots are based on constituent responses and that should come back to us. I know you don't have that ready today, but certainly if it could come back to us prior to the August 19th Budget Oversight Committee meeting for and make that available to the full council. I also wonder, Mr. Chapman, if you would be able to take a moment today to share information about the Park Patrol program, which you mentioned earlier, and I know several of us have discussed it. It's being developed by you and your team. And certainly I know what that is, what the description of the program is. But I think if we could have an understanding of what your goals are and intention is and how that may help cover these hotspots and other areas. Councilman, thank you for asking. And I'm sorry I didn't go deeper into it in the presentation, but we just implemented the Park Patrol program. We have about 10 to 12 staff members who were trained by the police department, same type of training that the the LBA ambassadors get. So they're going to be trained or they are trained now to look for incidences where police would have to be called in and they will call things like drug use, you know, loitering, you know, some of the activities that aren't conducive to users of the park, but they also will engage with all of the park patrons. They're going to be talking to the park patrons. If there's an issue or instance where they can intervene and ask them to stop, they will do that. If they can't, they'll call the police department. We have some really dynamic staff that have been assigned to this program and they are not shy as the Bixby Park community folks met them last night and they can attest to that. Our hope is that they're going to take ownership of these parks. This is these are their parks and they're going to call in problems. They're going to identify problems. And I think, you know, in just a few months, we'll see a dramatic improvement in the park system because they're out there. They're the eyes and ears of the department, but they're also the eyes and ears of the police department and the neighborhood. So I think will make a tremendous improvement in the park system with the park patrol program. What's the number of staff members you have that you envision for this? Well, right now it's for Bixby Park and we're also using it for critic. So we have 12 in the hours right now. The hours at Bixby and Shattuck are evening hours Monday through Friday from four to about 8:00, 830 weekends. It's 8 hours a day, Saturday and Sunday. They're out there 8 hours a day. So they're a team of two walking together, working together. Those are the hours. Okay. Thank you. And going back to the request for information, do you think you'd be able to have that ready by the August? Absolutely. Get it ready. I appreciate that. The second part of my question or comments and question for Parks Recreation Marine has to do with the irrigation. Councilmember O'Donnell brought this up and the rebates and more of what Long Beach water can do to participate on the sprinkler head issue. We have a very aging system. And so what what metropolitan rebates, we will not rebate on aging systems because their interest is to get us to update our system so that we can be more water efficient. So I don't want to leave us with the impression that we're not qualified for those rebates. We are if our systems are up to date, our systems are not. And so I want to be sure that. And is that accurate, Mr. Chapman? Yes, ma'am. That's accurate. And I think we're working on updating, like, as you said, these one times really will help to build in calcium sensors, electronic sensors. So at some point, we'll probably qualify more for rebates from the water department. And one of the things I wanted to share with my council colleagues is that about four, maybe five years ago, Mr. City Manager will remember with our previous department head, Parks Rec and Marine, we went to Metropolitan Water District with a proposal to do a facilities master plan, a facilities update, master plan for irrigation systems. We still have areas in the city, many areas, unfortunately, where it requires a staff person to go and turn on the sprinkler system, requires a staff person to go and turn it off. When you mentioned earlier that if there is a leak, you're notified of it and you go out there and you address it. But daily on a daily basis, we are literally firefighters out there with our irrigation system, which is a huge waste of staff resources. So at that time, several years ago, we did have funding commitment from Metropolitan Water District to update to at least conduct a study on what it would require to update our irrigation system so that it would be on a master command control type of an operation. That is the direction that we need to move as opposed to making these incremental fixes. And so what I've asked the water department to do is to dust off that report that was done by Mr. Tom Shippy back in the day. I thought it was a good report at the time. Certainly your staff can update that, but that's the direction we need to go. Otherwise we will constantly be fighting these fires and spending really good money after bad as opposed to doing an overhaul. And Mr. City Manager, I know that I've discussed this with you. That's something that I we made a decision at the time, meaning city staff did not to pursue it. I don't remember exactly what the argument was then. And it's a regret that I have on on our collective part that we did not pursue that because the timing would have been right at that time and we would be well underway to having a facilities update. So that's something that I would like you, Mr. Champion, to talk with Kevin Wade here at the Long Beach Water Department and get briefed on where we were with that. I know there's interest on the water department to pursue that again as a long range plan. It's not going to fix anything right now, but I'm on a long term going forward basis. We need to do that. Just Vice Mayor, I should let you know that we we did receive a $95,000 grant from with the help of the water department through the Metropolitan Water District to do an audit of 20 of our parks, 20 of our large parks. So we do have an audit that's somewhat very lengthy. It's about two, 300 pages, and it addresses each park and there's about 20, 30 pages for each park in terms of the type of fixes. So we've started that process and we'll continue it and we'll do the rest of the parts as well. So just to let council know, we have started it and we've been working with the Technology Services Department over the past six months to upgrade the technologies. And in about a month, many of those systems will be updated to the Cal sensors. So we have started that and we do have a big audit and we're moving ahead with those fixes. I appreciate that. I think in addition to that, we do need to automate our systems so we don't have human beings going out there to do that, which it's great to have even beings out on the park, but maybe to do other things, not to turn on sprinkler systems. The other piece I would like to address also is when I have asked the city manager for this, but also for the budget oversight committees consideration, if you could provide a list of the irrigation system needs and separate them between potable systems and recycle water systems because there is a difference in in priority. Certainly if we still have parks that are on potable systems, we most likely would need to address those first and balance those needs. But it's good for us to know and good for us to see which systems we're talking about and where the needs are. And finally, on Long Beach Water Department's participation, one thing I will share, which I think all of us know, is that we do have a $10 million transfer from Long Beach Water Department through the pipeline fee. We don't call it a transfer, but it is a pipeline fee that brings $10 million into our system. So they do contribute very heavily to supporting City of Long Beach efforts. And I know the mayor and I have chatted about this in the years past, and so I want to be sure everyone knows that the water department is doing its part in assisting the city to the tune of $10 million. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Price. Thank you. Thank you. To the department heads who gave us presentations tonight. I share. Councilmember Lowenthal, please. Questions and interest in finding out more about the park ranger program. And I want to commend you on your staff in implementing the Park Patrol program. I understand that the the initiation of that program was successful and well-received. So I want to thank you for that. I think it's very important that we as city leaders take every measure to make sure that the parks are safe and take the attitude of if our own kids aren't okay to play in that park, then why should other kids? So I think that's the attitude with which I will be looking at the information that you provide for us. I did have a question for library services, if that's okay. Well, first of all, as a mom of two elementary school age boys, thank you for giving them the outlets that they need to hopefully be literate and maybe go to college. But the question that I, I have for you is that's our hope. That's what we're working towards. But the question I have for you is, what is the status of library hours on Sundays and what would be involved for us to be able to allow our libraries to either be open additional hours on Sundays or if we were able to move some of the scheduling around to allow some more access on Sundays so that working parents could have opportunities on additional opportunities on the weekends to take their kids to the library. Mm hmm. Councilmember Price, those are some great questions. Currently, we are not open on any Sundays. Right now, we're a five day operation to maximize the staffing that we have are open Tuesday through Saturday. To be open on Sundays, we would need additional funds that have to get back to you as far as what that would cost in the way of staffing. So I have to get back to you on that. Okay. Would it be possible to move some of the days around at various libraries to accommodate more openings on on Sundays and other days? That's something we can look at. Okay. Thank you. You're welcome. Thank you. And our final number is concern for your anger that will to public comment. Boy, did I learn something today. You want to be in the queue? Get early and good. Yeah, I'll be late. And really, a lot of the stuff that I had had already been answered. So what? I just closed my book and let's go to night out. Actually, I do have different spin on some things, but I'm not going to play musical chairs. I hope I don't, but I think I will. I'm going to talk. My question is mostly related to Parks and Recreation. So one more time, last time. Then you can rest. Look, it's a good exercise opportunity. It's been pretty much pretty well discussed in terms of what's going on with our programs for artificial turf, as well as the replacing outdated and irrigation systems, not only at this part but at others. And Suja touched a button with me in terms that I was going to talk about, and that's about reclaiming the water and just wanting to know if there is any that that you might have that says how many of our parks are on reclaimed water and maybe how many projects you have out there that would convert some of these irrigation systems into reclaimed water? Since we are we know very well that we are in a drought and we have to look at creative ways of being able to keep our parks. GREEN. And do you have any any of the plans out there in terms of converting some of our irrigation systems or to reclaiming water ? Councilman, we do have a list of parks. We have about 24 parks that are on the reclaim system. You know, they differ from Cherry Park, Colorado Lagoon, Eldorado. Most of the East Side parks are on the recycled system and the West Side parks from potable in. Those are projects that in terms of converting, converting the other parks to recycled water is something that the water department would do because they have to lay the foundation and the infrastructure. So really right now kind of at their mercy in terms of converting those parks that are on potable water to recycled. So it's just a matter of them laying the infrastructure for recycled. Well, maybe that would be something that we want to investigate and study. Perhaps we could convert more of those. And the only reason I say that, although while it might be a noble effort to convert many of these fields into artificial turf, to me it's the more you do it, the more we turn into a cardboard jungle , concrete jungle, if you will, where there's nothing alive, nothing thriving, nothing adding to the atmosphere. So if we can, I'd like to see an increase in the parks with recyclable water, and that would include some of the medians and parkways to convert some of those where we don't need to use of the water better to go into somebody's hydration than dehydration. The other point I want to talk about that you have here an item regarding the reorganization of animal care services. And in it you say that there is no budget or it's a neutral budget and FTE neutral. But are there are there are there are ideas for revenue generation. I mean, it's also you do raise the revenues in animal control. Are you having any plans for raising revenue, raising fees that would provide a better opportunity for the city to get some revenue in to help animal care services provide better services? Councilman, we're always looking at our fees and what we want to make sure is we balance our fees with the needs of the community. Even things like dog licenses. You know, we've got areas that people have a hard time affording the dog license. So we've got to be able to maintain it at a level where people can at least come in and pay for the license for the dogs, because we want to get as many license dogs as possible. And even, you know, the the spay and neuter, we try to keep those low. We have spay neuter clinics where we provide it for free. There's a large community out there that is going to need some of these services at a low level. But we are looking at it. We always look at revenue potential revenue sources. We've got fundraisers for animal care. We have the friends of the Long Beach Animal Shelter who are always doing fundraising. They've helped us with a new clinic, a separate trailer this year that costs, I think, $100,000. The city council kicked in 50,000 and they raised the other 50,000 to provide some extra space down there. So we're always looking at that. We're also looking at other cities contracting with other cities and can we raise revenue from other cities? So we have we've talked to another city recently and we're looking at a potential potential contract that could at least help us bring in more money to serve all the cities that we serve. Well, you touched all the right buttons. Thank you. And I thank you for the orientation you gave me this afternoon. It was a very informative. Thank you very much. Okay. Well, thank you. At this time of the budget hearing, I'm going to open it up to members of the public. So please come on down and form a line here for public comment on the budget, come forward and as before any comes up, I just want to just take. A quick sec and thank also all of the budget officers and all the people over here that I see that have worked so hard and all these budget. So thank you all for the hard work as well as the department heads and all the presentations tonight. So thank you. Please. Hi, my name is Annie Greenfeld. Thank you very much for this budget presentation. I'm going to give you just a little tiny bit of background. Better balance for Long Beach has been kind of overseeing 14th Street Park at the request of Washington Neighborhood Association, and we're really pleased with the improvements that have been done. I'd like to thank the First District Council Office and Mayor Garcia for putting in the fitness zone in that area. There's just one little hiccup and that's no fence. This is a median strip park, as some of you may know. And the mommas go out there with their kids and they try to work out on the fitness equipment, but they have to keep one hand on the kid because they're afraid they're going to run out into the street. And I'm hoping that somewhere you'll find a little bit of money to put in that fence so that the children can be safe. That's the first request. And that actually came from Linda Palacios at Washington Neighborhood Association. My second little issue is and it's not really an issue, I'd really like you to study the artificial turf. In the soccer field at Seaside Park. That soccer field has been a problem from day one. And because of the transient neighborhood, I think it's really going to be a problem having the artificial turf. So I'd just like you to take a second look at it. Also, the park patrol. I have to thank Vice Mayor Lowenthal for. And if she's not here right now, but, you know, for for bringing the community in on what's going on. The problem has been at 14th Street Park, there are drug dealers, there are kids and people smoking pot. And I'm just not sure why. 14th Street Park is not one of the pilot programs on that park patrol. And I'd like you to really consider that because there are so many homeless issues down there. And I just really think that Washington neighborhood area deserves to be safe. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Thank you. Very good. Clark has the adjustment to item, and I'll be brief. First of all, in terms of water, obviously we face a crisis in this state and in the city. I think part of our solution is to return to having the city of Long Beach. Not contract out. It's landscaping. The landscape contractor could care less about the city of Long Beach, not sell with its employees. I've worked with when the when they were there in those services. They took a great deal of pride and care and interest. In keeping the sprinkler systems operating properly and efficiently. And I think we need to get inside of that. And return to having the city of Long Beach employees take care of that. And secondly, and before going to the second point, I appreciate the fact that this has been a data dump, as are by necessity. You have to process an awful lot of information both tonight and in future nights. But if there's one piece of information you leave here tonight with. Let it be this. That there exist no conditions. Under which any existing structure. Within the Marine Stadium. De facto or de jury as defined. By the original organic documents will ever be raised. Unless. Unless at the same time. There is a permit for a replacement with funding for that building. And the reason for that is brought into sharp focus by what so many of you had mentioned this evening relative to the explosion over years of the population of the city. That applies to our waterfront dynamics. The ability to serve is directly related to how well we can serve them and the structures that we have down there to support that activity. Much of these. We have a number of buildings there. Some are already repurposed. Some will be repurposed in the future. Those are needed for storage to support the dynamics on the waterfront. We can't build anything more in the Marine Stadium because of the houses. That's understood. You wouldn't want to buy a house and then have something built up two days later. So understand that. Never again will a building come down unless a replacement has been approved and is in place and the existing structures we have will stand. Thank you, Mr. Cohen. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good evening, Mayor Garcia and honorable counsel. My name is Dave Zanardi and I hail from the great eighth district. And I'm here this evening to represent a wonderful city organization, the sister cities of Long Beach. We are a 100% volunteer organization that spans all nine districts in our city. We have been involved in the city for over 50 years. And I do want to. For the new council people to want to mention our six existing long term sister cities. Mombasa, Kenya. Nam. Penh, Cambodia. Monta. Ecuador. Sochi, Russia. Qingdao, China. And this evening, it's my great honor to introduce a delegation from our oldest sister city, which is celebrating its 51st year here. David Chi Chi. Japan. I actually think that you probably want to speak to in public comment. This is a budget hearing. Public comment. Oh, but is there here and you've introduced them already? I will I will let you introduce them and then just make sure that everyone else is here for for the budget hearing comment and then public comment will be after. I apologize. Okay. Thank you for continuing us to do that. Sure. So now keep it short. I'd like to introduce Mr. Michael Bond, who is the past chairman of the Sister City Association. Mr. Mayor. Members of the Council is my privilege to present to you tonight the goodwill ambassadors from the city of York to Japan, for this is the 49th exchange of a teacher and students that we've had. This program is designed to create new leaders for our new century. And I'd like for them to introduce themselves. They have some gifts. First of all, they were selected by the mayor and the city assembly to represent your chi chi. And they are the official representatives from the city. They have brought a number of gifts, one particularly for Mayor Garcia from Mayor Tanaka, but also a book that celebrated the 50th anniversary that we celebrated last year, both in your chi chi and here. So may I present them to you, Megumi? Just introduce yourself. Hello, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Megumi Kondo. I'm an English teacher in junior high school in your city. 30 years ago, I had a chance to be treated on the beat as an exchange student with a YMCA program. This year, I could be back here, Long Beach, and we had a wonderful experience, I should say. Thank you very much. Alive, Long Beach. I just I'd like to tell my students how. Rhonda Rowland. Thank you. Me? My name is Amy Scala. I'm 17. Years old. Thank you for your kind of warm welcome. I want to develop the language and the sister city relationship. Thank you. Hiro. My name is Masako Tagawa. I'm 16 years old and I'm. I, I'm happy because I can. Have a. Wonderful experience here. So I'm. Thank you. Thank you for. That. Mayor Garcia Masako has a letter from Mayor Tanaka for you and a gift from him to you. And these are gifts from the City Assembly for the members of the City Council. And if we may, may we get a photograph with you and the. The trio. Well, they're doing this. I'd like you to close your eyes and envision two of our students and one of our teachers doing the exactly same thing in their city each year as an exchange. Thank you very much, Mr.. And thank you for letting us take this slot. Yes. Thank you. Thank you very much. We're not talking. Mayor Garcia and council members and staff. I just wanted to thank you for having these budget presentations and allowing the Department of Library Services to present all of the information they presented. I always learn something new. We try to keep on top of all of the programs they're doing, but they really are amazing. I'd like to thank Linda and her staff for the tremendous job they did and for the presentation they gave and congratulate them on the summer reading program and their record attendance. I think Glenda said some really terrific statistics about why libraries are so important to our community and why we really need them as that tool to help with the prevention of crime and keeping our kids busy, especially during those summer months, to both prevent the reading slide and to help them get the tools that they need to raise those literacy rates which will benefit all of us. We I represent the Long Beach Public Library Foundation, but we also have members of a separate nonprofit, the Friends of the Long Beach Public Library, also in attendance. And so I'm speaking on behalf of both those organizations and our supporters. And I want to thank you for both having the Department of Library Services here and for many of you coming to see our libraries, attend our programs and make time for tours. For those of you who have not yet seen our studio space that Glenda mentioned, I'd love to host you on a tour. It's amazing what libraries are doing. And I'd also like to say that we were so pleased to see in the recommendations from Mayor Garcia the $200,000 in one time funds to add to books and materials. We, both organizations and our supporters support this recommendation, and we hope that you will understand the importance of it. The books and materials. We monitor state statistics to see how we compare with our with our sister cities and Oakland, which is usually the best comparison. City spends $3.84 per resident on books and materials while we spend $1.73. And we really can do better. And so we appreciate Mayor Garcia recognizing that education and libraries are so important in making that recommendation. So we do hope that when it comes time that you will see libraries is an important, important use for those one time funds. We look forward to a continued partnership with all of you. We welcome the new council members and look forward to continuing to talk about the branch libraries in your districts and the libraries that your constituents use. So we also thank you for your comments on open libraries and look forward to a continued discussion that does match what our constituents are saying to us as well. So thank you again. Thank you, sir, very much. Kathleen. Hi. My name is Kathleen Irvine. I'm the president of Whitmore City Heritage Association in the First District. And although we are a preservation organization, part of our mission statement has to do with the quality of life in our area and in our neighborhood. So two of the things I wanted to address is, first of all, for code enforcement. My understanding is that there were 28 people boots on the ground, as Angela said, and originally code enforcement used to patrol our neighborhood. But I have not noticed that happening any longer. I don't know if that's because of cuts or just the safety issue, but it was very helpful because especially if, as Ms.. Burdick said, they instigate Saturday patrols. There's a lot of stuff, you know, in the cat's away, the mice are playing, and we're kind of tired of watching the things that happen on weekends. And we have no recourse if there is a patrol around, a lot of things will not happen simply because there's a patrol and they know somebody is watching. So that would be very helpful. The other thing I wanted to address is our parks. I was just made aware of the Park Patrol program and I am aware also that it's my understanding that there are three park rangers over at El Dorado Park. So my request is simply that all parks are equitable as far as safety because we all have the same issues. There are homeless, there is drug use, there is narcotics going on, and if the parks are to serve all of us, then we all need to feel safe, especially Drake and Chavez, which are so close to the river where you guys know what that means. It means homeless. And it's sad to me to hear that parents that are living in the downtown feel that these parks are unsafe to take their children. I don't like hearing that. The other thing about the parks is I don't know what the hours are at the other parks, but if you are serving our community, if you go to Drake at any time on the weekends, there are at least 150 literally. Children playing there. Why are we not open on Sunday? Why is Chavez not open on Saturday and Sunday? Why are they not closed on Monday and Tuesday? Surely there's a way for our population of children to be able to go to the parks on the weekend with their parents or their grandparents and their family. So I really think that if you guys could look into that as. Well as code enforcement patrols on Saturday. That would really help us. Thank you. Thank you, Kathleen. Hello. Good afternoon. My name is Jim Danno. I'm also with the Bellmore City Heritage Association. Councilwoman Gonzalez, I support your solution to having code enforcement work on the weekends, maybe take a day off during the week. I think that would really help us out with the illegal activities that are happening mostly on the weekends. With that being said, I'd like to also see the administrative citation that's over $100. Quite honestly, if you're installing $7,000 for the vinyl windows, $100 bills are going to make a difference. I'd like to see that be the first action, possibly even increasing it up to, let's say, $1,000 to where you had 35 days to correct the violation. And if you decide on your own to waive that correction, then you will be assessed that thousand dollar fine. That will also help with the general fund. Hopefully it will collect quite a bit of revenue going that route. Parks. Parks does a good job. I like to see that the new water app also have to do with maintenance. The best tool the citizens of Long Beach have right now is to go Long Beach app. It puts the power of the people right in your hand when you're seeing the violations. If maybe to help out parks, seeing some of the maintenance issues that aren't being addressed, it'll make it quicker to get those things changed. Going to Councilman Austin, I believe you were talking about parks and you have kind of underserved area with a lack of parks. Chavez Park and Drake Park have helped the community. Community has helped Parks and Rec combined with private partnerships, and it gives the community a chance to invest in their neighborhood with their parks and kind of get more bang for the buck. Actually. Also really quick with that is that you're talking about the wetlands program of a DeForest. We've also hopefully the Drake Park, Chavez also has a wetlands. We've got millions of gallons of water running freely right down the L.A. River. I'd love to see some of that water diverted over to maybe wetlands so that we can take that and use that as a greywater system to water our irrigation on the West Side parks. With that being said, thank you very much for your time. Thank you, Jim. Next speaker. Hi there. My name is Claudia Skow and I'm president of Friends of Bixby Park. And I first wanted to thank Councilwoman Susan Lowenthal and Councilwoman Susan Price for bringing this Park Public Safety program to the attention of the council. One of the biggest public safety concerns by your constituents right now is at our local parks, and we've got about 160 parks in Long Beach. And it's not just at Drake Park or Chavez Park. It's citywide. And ever since the park ranger program was cut from the budget three years ago, our city parks have are in desperate need of support from park rangers. And until Parks and Rec can come up with a program that will work to provide public safety at our local parks. We have public drug dealing and public drug use, a lot of pot smoking right in front of families. Parents are really annoyed and very disappointed about this. The park patrol program that Mr. Chapman just mentioned is actually the second program that we've had at Bixby Park over the past couple of months. The first program was a park ambassador program that we funded ourselves with funding that we obtained from Mercedes-Benz of Long Beach, specifically for park safety, public safety, because we found hypodermic needles and glass crack pipes, and that man is snoring really loud. So I hope I'm not boring him. But so we have this program in place and we asked Parks and Rec to cancel it because we were getting emails from residents who were complaining that the ambassadors were not being effective in their jobs. There was still public pot smoking, and there were situations where residents felt that there may be drug dealing over at parcel one near the planters, which is a hotspot. And so after complaining to Parks and Rec and forwarding all these emails, we did successfully get Long Beach P.D. out there. They sent in undercover police officers and. They did arrest. Two drug dealers there. So this is where. All this frustration is coming from. It's not just Bixby Park, it's citywide. I have reached out to the neighborhood association presidents around the city, and I'm hearing similar stories. And they're all very happy to sign a letter to city council asking for help immediately with either park rangers that we already have on staff or pleading to please find some small budget for one or two extra. Thank you. Thank you so much. Next speaker, please. Good evening, Mr. Mayor and City Council. My name is Carrie Gallagher. I'm the executive director of housing Long Beach, and my information is on file. We're really grateful at Housing Long Beach for the conversation that was opened tonight about code enforcement and the existing program that serving our city. Because for us, it really relates to housing quality and substandard housing issues, which are often referred to the code enforcement department. We had the opportunity to have a positive meeting with Ms.. Reynolds and Ms.. Ranka just last week. And we learned, just like all of you did tonight, that the existing code enforcement department is extremely effective. As you heard tonight, 91% of cases come into compliance within 120 days. So the critical question in front of us is not is it working, but it is working for whom? The question really has to lie. Who are the current cases? Who are the people reporting these things? And through our conversations with many of you, I've often shared that the large majority of existing cases being reported are oftentimes by homeowners about their neighbors, whether it's weeds, you know, paint issues, trash, things like that. The people who are not reporting are the renters living inside a substandard home with health and safety violations who are absolutely fearful of retaliation. And there is no question or doubt it's not a complex issue. That is why people are not reporting. And so, again, it's this question of we see really good numbers, but we have to ask who is not currently being served under the existing program? Housing Long Beach has done hundreds of surveys, primarily through laundry mat outreach throughout the city, and less than 5% of the residents with whom we've spoken have received a routine inspection or if they have had issues, have ever reported it to the existing code enforcement program. One of the most disheartening stories we've heard was of a mother who whose children were very ill. And so she took them to the doctor. And the doctor quickly determined that the illness was due to lead poisoning. The doctor said, I'm sorry, but I have to report this. And when the inspector came out the following day or a few days later, the next day, the woman received an eviction notice. Now this woman and the thousands of renters across our city have little or no protection under the existing city ordinances for fear of retaliation or rent increases if they are to report safety and health violations within their home to the existing code enforcement program. So, again, we really have to ask ourselves now who is currently being served but who is falling through the cracks? And so we really look forward to working with you. I have really good news for all of you that protecting people doesn't cost anything. It causes it's political will from you all to say that people who are renting in this city matter and they deserve to be protected. And so we look forward to working with you on the upcoming ordinance on other protections for renters and on the issues of housing quality within our city. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hello, everybody. My name is James Hall, currently known for being a sort of guy in auto on one lap and 45 seconds. Some professional track athlete. I was focusing on the Park and recreation and also the library too as well. I've put together a program that focuses on 21st Common Core values. I've noticed that the children, they love academics, they love athletics. Too bad politics is mainly their main focus. I've noticed that with this program we're able to attack literature, English, math, geography all through fitness. We hook kids up to one of my sponsors, which is Polar, hook them up to heart rate monitors, and they get to see how graphs go up and graphs go down when they stay in his own. Kids are happy and excited when they get to win awards. So incentives matter too, as well. So I came here today just to discuss that. How could we come together to get into the school systems? Because it starts with who you around the most you are who you surround yourself around. And if anti-bullying is going on at school, if drugs and different things are going on at school. That's the foundation. It's getting late at school. So they take it to the parks and it continues to go on and on and on again. So I would think we should form a program that focuses on attacking the schools first with the people in the workers that you have already at the parks and the staff grooming them to be able to display what it is that I've already put out in structure this program that I've created. It's already at five schools in the city of Long Beach, Barden. Duly Garfield, Carver and MacArthur. And you duly have seen the Graves race within three months. So just imagine if I had a whole school year to again work with the Parks and Recreation on again building a safety. Healthy community as we come together to form one thing, to be able to focus on these children. All right, you guys have a good day. Thank you. And her last public speaker. Hello. I'm Maureen Nealy. I'm on the board of Long Beach Heritage. And just quickly, I wanted to reiterate what several people tonight spoke about with the code enforcement issue. This has been on our radar for quite a while, as most of the council members know. We see we see code enforcement in our historic districts are 17 historic districts as not just a nice thing to have happen, but it is definitely a crime issue. It's the broken window theory. These historic districts often have homeowners. They are community minded residents and homeowners, and to support them through code enforcement so that things the wrong things don't denigrate these districts is very helpful overall to the city. We have spoken with the police and the development services as well as. See the police development services and the city prosecutor, and I anticipate having some meetings with them this year to move this forward. So we if we could make a statement that we really support having weekends and on call and ways to reach out to code enforcement when issues happen in our historic districts off the 9 to 5 clock, that would be fantastic. So thank you very much. You. Thank you very much. That's our last comment for the budget hearing. And so with that, I would like to ask for a motion to continue our budget hearing to the next meeting, which is on August the 12th. So move. Okay. There's been a motion, actually, Councilman Gonzales. I see you cued up. Who is at the gym. No comment. Okay. So there's been a motion in a second to continue the budget to October 12th. Members, please go ahead. And Castro votes. Okay. August 12th. Thank you. Motion carries nine zero. Okay. Excellent. Thank you. And thank you all for being for being patient. This is budget time. So these are regular meetings to start a little bit later because of the hearings. So from that, we're going to move on now on to public comment.

Recommendation to request City Attorney to prepare an ordinance amending Title 18 and other development-related sections of the Long Beach Municipal Code in order to adopt and amend the 2016 Edition of the California Building Standards Code. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_05032016_16-0381

Thank you. Is there any member of the public that wishes to address Council on Item 19? CNN members cast your vote. Motion carries. Okay. Item 20 Report. From Development Services and Fire Recommendation to request the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance amending Title 18 of the Long Beach Municipal Code in order to adopt and amend the 2016 edition of the California Building Standards Code Citywide. Madam Vice Mayor, Members of the Council, we are required by state law to update the building code, which is in Title 18 of the municipal code. Every three years the state will come out with their new building code standards on July 1st. We need to get the new triennial code in place by January 1st, 2017. We are requesting your permission to work on an ordinance to do that. Thank you, Councilmember Richardson. No. Thank you. Is there any member of the public that wish to address Council on item 20? Seeing None members cast your vote. Motion carries.

AS AMENDED a bill for an ordinance increasing the sales and use tax by a rate of 0.25 percent and dedicating the revenue derived from the tax rate increase to fund Denver parks, trails, and open space, subject to the approval of the voters at a special municipal election to be conducted in coordination with the state general election on November 6, 2018. Refers a measure to the eligible voters in Denver to extend the sales and use tax to be used to fund Denver’s parks and open space. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 6-12-18. Amended 7-16-18 to specify that canals are included in the intended use of the special revenue monies funded by the additional sales and use taxes, and, to require that the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board to hold no less than one public hearing and submit a five-year plan for the approval by City Council.

DenverCityCouncil_07162018_18-0641

the wall you'll see your time counting down. Speakers must stay on the topic of this hearing and must direct their comments to the Council as a whole. Please refrain from profane or obscene speech. Direct your comments to council as a whole and refrain from any personal or individual attacks. Councilman Herndon, will you please put Council Bill 641 on the floor? Yes, Mr. President, I move the council bill 641 to be placed upon final consideration and do pass. It has been moved. Can I get a second? It has been moved and seconded. And we're going to start with Councilwoman Black. You have a technical amendment, so your motion to amend. And move that council bill 18 Dash 0641 be amended in the following particulars on page four, Line 12 After rivers, insert canals on page five, line seven after rivers insert canals and on page six, line 19 after rivers insert canals. Thank you, Councilwoman Black. Comments by members of Council. Councilman Black. Thank you. This is a technical amendment specifying that canals are included in the intended use of the special revenue moneys funded by the additional sales and use taxes. And any other comments? All right. Seeing none. Madam Secretary, can we do a roll call on the amendment? Black Eye. Brooks Espinosa. Hi, Flynn. Hi. Gilmore. I Herndon. I cash in. I can eat. Lopez All right, new Ortega. SUSSMAN All right. Mr. President. I. Madam Secretary, please close the voting and announce the results. 12 Eyes 12 As Council Bill 641 has been amended for one hour. Courtesy Public Hearing for Council Bill 641 is open. May we have the overview from our very own? Good evening, President Park members of council. My name is Jack Rothman, legislative analyst for City Council. Give you a very brief overview on Council Bill 641. If you have questions, feel free to answer those as well. This bill essentially does three things. The first thing the bill does is positive. The question poses the question to the voters of the city and county of Denver. November six to approve a quarter of a percent sales and use tax. This tax will be solely dedicated towards parks and open space. None of the provisions of this bill will take effect unless that tax is approved by the voters. The additional tax will result in approximately 46 million additional funds each year. Next thing the bill does is create a special revenue fund. This fund will be exclusively used for revenue derived by this additional tax and will be administered by the manager of Parks and Recreation. No more than 5% of this fund could be used annually for the administration of this fund. The fund also includes evidence of effort provision to ensure that the funding will be spent on the approved uses. The Manager of Parks Recreation must submit an annual report on the expenditures to council the Mayor, the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board and the auditor. The lesson measure also must submit a five year plan of the expenditures, starting within the first year of adoption. The lesson this bill accomplishes is to prescribe what the fund may be used for. The acceptable uses of the fund are acquiring additional land for parks, open spaces and trails, developing, improving and maintaining new and existing parks, including Denver's mountain parks, open spaces and trails. Restoring and protecting waterways. Rivers. Canals and streams. Purchasing and carrying of trees. And operating. And maintaining any additional acquisitions and capital improvements to the city's parks, mountain parks, and open space. And with that, I'm happy to field any questions on this bill. Thank you very much. Tonight, we do have 25 individuals sign up to speak and it is a courtesy hearing. So we only have an hour. So I would ask that if your comments can be shorter than 3 minutes to make sure that we can get through everybody or as many as possible, please do. If you're sitting in this first seat up here, I'm and ask if you could please move so that we can get speakers lined up and get through as quickly as possible. I will call up the first five speakers and I do apologize if I mispronounce your name. If I call you up, please make your way to this now empty first bench. And as soon as I call your name, there will be a slight delay. But then your time will start as you step up to the podium. So our first five speakers are Harriet Lemaire, Jonathan Capelli, Jesse Perez, Chairman Sekou and Hillary Patel. If you five could come up to the front and Harriet Lemaire, you are up. First. The podium is yours. Go ahead. Go ahead. Okay. Time is of the essence. My name is Harriet Lemaire, and I'm the director of the Highline Canal Conservancy. And I'm here to. Well, first, I want to introduce Alanna Webber and Brianna Winters from our staff. I'm here because of the young people. I'm not going to be around if you see this money invested in the community. I may not be here to see that, but you guys are leaders and you have opportunities sometimes to reach your hand well into the future. And this is one of those opportunities and I think it's so exciting. The Highline Canal moves through now, as you know, 11 different governmental jurisdictions. I wanted to mention that it travels through four counties and Denver is the only county that doesn't have an open space tax, a dedicated fund. And we're challenged as we think about the long term future planning for the canal, what that means for Denver. So the minute I heard about this, I thought, this is true leadership. This is an opportunity not just for the Highline Canal, it's an opportunity for your existing parks, but to find new entities, new miles, new acreage, find old ditches, you know, find all the infrastructure, intertwined nature throughout this community as richly as we can for the benefit of all the citizens in this community. There are 17.6 miles in Denver and over 100,000 people roughly living in the adjoining neighborhoods. And you know which neighborhoods there are. Of that population, that's 13% of the Denver population, 20%, 26% of those people are Latino that live along the Highline Canal, 19% are African-American, 4% are Asian, and 4% represent one or more races. So more than 54% of those people living that close to the Highline Canal are not white. So let's claim these entries. Let's claim these parks, the adjacent old infrastructures, old ditches, whatever you can find. Let's get this on the ballot. Let our voters voters vote for it and embrace this community as one of the richest, greenest communities for all people forever. Thanks. Thank you, Jonathan Capelli. Thank you councilmembers for taking the time to listen to our comments today for your engagement with me and others over the weekend to discuss this and particular thanks to you Council President John because of your obvious passion to about, you know, green space and open space and parks and recreation as evidenced by this bill, our ordinance. I'm not speaking on behalf of DC today, but as a resident of District ten and also as a board member of all in Denver, in many ways we support much of what this measure is trying to accomplish and fully agree about the importance of everyone, including especially children, having access to more open space. On a personal note, parks in open space are a very serious issue for me because of my grandmother's passion for them. This is a woman who lived in a pretty low income area in North Philadelphia, and despite really sort of difficult circumstances in all her free time always took kids in the neighborhood out to the Pokeno mountains and to parks that were even in the in that city that the kids weren't even aware of were in their own city before. There any studies or anything supporting, you know, the connection between parks and childhood development. Intuitively, she knew that it was really important to make sure that everyone had access to this. We're not quite as a park deficit as North Philly was in the in the eighties, but it's still a big issue. So, however, there are some issues with this ordinance that really affect our ability to fully throw our weight behind us. We agree that no person or child should be barred from having access to plentiful, high quality parks. But if we're really about providing access to everyone, then we have to critically examine whom our investments are going to serve. Are we building a green city for everyone or just a green city for the slut class that will be able to afford to live here in the future? Health, transportation, education and housing are not and should not be treated as competing priorities, but they certainly have better outcomes when they're coordinated together. So to ensure that happens, we need to consider a couple of caveats to this ordinance. I believe one or we believe it's all in Denver. One is a lower tax rate potentially, and a sunrise, which leaves room for investment and other priorities. Number two is working in a responsive community and a community investment plan that's responsive to the individual economic situations of different neighborhoods in the city. And three, a comprehensive anti displacement strategy that's coordinated with EADS, anti displacement strategy to make sure that the unintended effects that new parks will have to mitigate the unintended effects the new parks will have and are already accelerating and skyrocketing land values. It's also important to note that there's a slight inconsistency inherent in choosing to not modestly increase sales tax to raise funds for low income programs because of that, because it's deemed too regressive. But then increase in that tax anyway to pay for something that doesn't yet have socioeconomic equity worked into it. If we work in the aforementioned bullets, I believe we'll be able to address that issue and move forward in a responsible way. Thank you very much. Next up, Jesse Paris. And Jesse Paris. Your next city council at large. Black Star action moment for self-defense. Denver out loud. We are against the sales tax increase. Denver currently has the urban camping ban. So how is this going to benefit us if we can't even occupy these parks or these trails already? Spaces? It seems really hypocritical that you want to increase taxes on Parks and Rec, but yet there is no tax for affordable housing or, as we love to say, attainable housing in the city of Denver. So, yeah, Denver, homicidal La Blackstar, some movement. We are against this. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, Chairman Sekou. Yes. Excuse me. Chairman Seiko founder organized the Black Star Action Movement for self-defense and also the next mayor 2019 City Council in Denver. We stand. The Post. To this increase in tax, which is no more than a increase in taxes on the poor who can't afford another penny being spent on amenities that are not for us. We need jobs. We need housing. We need apprenticeship programs for the carpenters, unions and other unions so that we can come up and have the opportunity of participating in the success of the city that the mayor conveniently ignores. So why do we pay for this? We work hard for our money, and we refuse to be coconspirator to our own grouping by paying for it. Absolutely not. Now, to consider this as a buddy, you got to be kidding me. Out of all the prior or teasing things that needs to be done and time, you are voting for a sales increase tax, excise tax for the squirrels. Damn a home that we ain't gotten for the ducks to take a shit, but we ain't got no place to sit. Mr. Speaker, please watch your language. Oh, excuse me. A laboratory. What do you call it? What do you call that thing? The little box that use it. And Mrs. Porta Potty. We ain't got a porta potty to do what we need to do, nor a pot to throw in it. But this is for the ducks. This is for the squirrels. You got to be kidding me. What that says as a body is that you have no respect for the poor whatsoever. Whatsoever? Because where's our tax? And how come it ain't on the agenda before all of this mess? Come on, y'all. You got help me? It takes teamwork to make the team work. And you don't do that by excluding the masses of the people and participating in some of their lives. And I've been down there for 12 years. Saying the same thing. Ow! Ow, ow, ow. And over and over and over. And over and over and over. And you don't get. You don't get it. So why should we still come down here? Wow. Well, I'll tell you right now. I'm expanding every possible avenue to give you every opportunity to do the right thing for the right reason. Because. Just zip for me. This is it. This is it. After dip. Mr. Take your time is up. Talking. Your time is up. Next up, Hillary portal. And, well, Hillary, come up. I would invite. But invite Wade. Shelton, Brad SIEGEL, David Richter, Mark Thompson and Ann Elizabeth to work your way up to the front pew. You're the next five. Go ahead. I'm Hillary Patel. I live at 1124 South Milwaukee Street and I'm on the board of All in Denver. Thank you, Councilman Clark, for your lifetime commitment to Parks and Recreation and our community and for meeting with us to discuss our concerns about this proposal. Overall, we support continued investment in the park system. Parks are a critical part of Denver's quality of life and health, and it's clear to us that they haven't kept up with our city's growth. What troubles us is the size and scale of this tax. During an unprecedented time in our city, at a time of widening income inequality, unrelenting displacement, and decreasing federal funding for social services. Is this proposal the best response? Are you going to ask Denver voters to approve the highest sales tax increase in recent memory with no plan for how funds will be spent and no ability to decide in the future if we want to continue taxing ourselves for this. Have unintended consequences been planned for? Shouldn't we coordinate our public investments to enhance our community while reducing the top two expenses for most households housing and transportation? After all, these are your priorities for 2018 and 2019, published and released to the public just six months ago. The thing is, nobody gets everything they want. Advocates go for it. We have many competing priorities. We all go for as much as we can get. And after a rigorous public process, we do the best with what we can. We make the most of what we're able to get. We should leave room in Denver for taxes to support future needs. And those needs are now. The question should be, how will Denver be a city where everyone matters during the Trump administration? Please reduce this tax, add a sunset mechanism and provide a plan for how investments will be aligned with the mayor's new neighborhood equity strategy announced today. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, we'd show. Thank you, President Clark. Members of City Council. My name is Wade Shelton, and I'm here to speak on behalf of the Trust for Public Lands Denver based Colorado program. And as a Denver resident, I wish to offer a strong endorsement of the bill to offer Denver voters the opportunity to create a dedicated source of funds for the city's parks, trails, and open space. The parks trails and open space. The trails and recreation opportunities in Denver improve our quality of life and are an important investment in our future and for Main Street to mountain tops. Denver boasts a diverse park system, including 6000 acres of urban parkland, 244 city parks, 28 recreation centers, and 14,000 acres of land in Denver mountain parks. And over the past 11 years, I've had the privilege, as have many of my colleagues at the Trust for Public Land. I'm working with many of you and many communities around Denver to help complete land acquisitions, to create new parks and activate and create and redesign old ones. Whether it's Quattro Ventures Park in Denver's Westwood neighborhood, New Freedom Park, a park for refugee families and athlete populations in East Denver, the River North Park in Denver's Reno neighborhood, or the Montebello Open Space Park in Montebello. We've been part of a lot of great projects that are ensuring all Denver residents, regardless of their income or what neighborhood they live in or what walk of life they come from, have the same access to the outdoors. But sadly, that many of those projects would be impossible to complete today, given the growth of the real estate market in Denver. We're looking at $200 a square foot for downtown real estate. And despite the best philanthropic efforts, the trust for public land, great outdoors, Colorado and the city and county of Denver. Your great Parks Department cannot meet the needs of our community. The longer we wait to restore and maintain our parks trail open space, the more it will cost us in the long run. By making investments today, we can afford avoid more costly problems in the future and leverage millions of dollars in matching funds. Every front range county. But Denver has local dedicated funds for parks, trails and natural areas. And we're missing out. Our parks and trails provide affordable recreation close to home for everyone. And I get to I'm fortunate enough that I get to experience going to Denver City Park every day because I live close to it. But everyone in this room, every citizen in this city, deserves to have those same opportunities, and that will help create the quality of life that health lifts up everyone. And not just those of us who are lucky enough to live near a watch park or a city park. By referring this funding measure, Denver voters will have the opportunity to approve and maintain our parks, trails and natural areas and quality of life now and for generations to come. And I urge you to vote yes. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, Brad SIEGEL. My name is Brad SIEGEL. I reside on Detroit Street in Congress Park. Chairman Clark, congratulations. Glad your mother was here earlier. She's a schoolteacher. She actually impacted my own son and gave him a love for creative writing. She does really good work. Tonight, I am speaking as a co-founder of All in Denver. We are a nonprofit advocacy organization. That believes. An equitable city is where all people have the opportunity to. Prosper and thrive. Overall, we we support. Continued investment in. The city's park system. We view parks as an important. Component. Of a thriving and equitable. City. However, as have been voiced by prior speakers. From our board, we do have concerns with the size and the. Scope of the initiative the council is getting ready to vote on tonight. We would. Be more supportive. Of this. Proposal if it had three. Characteristics. One, if it was smaller, a smaller tax, lower tax, and also had a sunset mechanism. So as. Hillary and and Jonathan mentioned, that voters. Could look at this again in five or ten years and see if it's something they want to. Continue to. It needs to be guided by a community based. Plan. That will make sure that there's investment in our neglected neighborhoods in the city, but also make sure there are. Anti. Displacement measures in place so. That we're not accelerating property. Values with the best of intentions and displacing. More people over time. Thirdly, we also want. To see how this aligns with the top priorities of this council. This council was very. Clear back in January that affordable housing and transportation are the. Top two priorities for Denver moving forward. We remain we don't see how that. Connection has been made in this proposal. One other concern we have. Is opportunity cost. This is an aggressive, aggressive tax proposal. This would be the largest sales. Tax initiated by Denver City Council in modern. Memory. It joins an already crowded ballot with. Transportation. Scholarship and mental health initiatives as well. If all. Of these initiatives are passed or some. Of these initiatives are passed, we are concerned. Where do we go to three, four or five years from now. When we have a whole new series of challenges and we need revenue and we've tapped out the community's. Appetite to support it. So in conclusion, we do urge restraint and accountability. If you decide to move the initiative forward. Thanks. Thank you. Next up, David Richter. Mr. President Council. My name is David Richter live at 252, Pennsylvania. I'm Councilman Clark's representative on the Denver Parks and Recreation Advisory Board. The bill. If you get a little bit closer to the microphone, we can't hear you. So just just right under the microphone there. Yeah. Okay. Sorry. Sort of. No, just keep looking. Okay. So the bill you're considering has been drafted, I think, with more than just an appreciation for the challenges to maintain the existing park system, but also in recognition that because of the growth our city is experiencing and will continue to experience, the concept of a park of the city in a park is becoming kind of wishful thinking . Does Denver need more parks? Well, you've heard the the Park Square rankings from the Trust for Public Lands. I know you've seen the outdoor downtown master plan. Does Denver need more services? Look at our deferred maintenance backlog. Look at the stress on our parks and our pools. Our fields, our rec centers, our courts. Let's not even to wade into dog parks or Scott will get up and leave the room, try to find a ranger when you really need one. Consider the budget impact of threats like the emerald ash borer. Costs like that. In terms of protecting our tree canopy or restoring our river and our streams. And I say all this despite really the excellent work I think the DPR continues to do. In addition, of course, the efforts, the kind of irreplaceable accomplishments of organizations like the Mt. Park Foundation, the Park People, Greenway Foundation, just to name a few. Well, every year Prabowo sends a white paper to DPR as guidance for planning, prioritization and spending. And this year, under the Revenue Goals and Spending Authority section of the paper we sent to DPR. I quote. Additionally and with emphasis. Parab again advocates for a dedicated and sustainable funding source for new land acquisition. Counsel, I know you're engaged in game plan and blueprint as we plan the future of our city. I think this bill gives you the opportunity to put some teeth on it and I support it. Thank you very much. Thank you. And next up, Mark Thompson. Thank you, President Clark, and congratulations. Members of council, thank you for the brief moment. I'm not going to speak in favor or against this tax. I don't know a lot about it, but hey, I, I, and my family enjoy parks and open space. The members of our organization enjoy the parks of our city. Another thing that we enjoy is opportunities for the youth of our communities. And it's been a year now. July of 2017, we came to the City Council. We spoke with individuals regarding requiring apprenticeship. Mr. Johnson rules to require you to stay on topic. On this because again, you are asking for an increase to a sales tax on the use tax and you're talking about building again with it. And I'm asking the city council and I'm asking the mayor of Denver to tie requirements of apprenticeship participation in those projects. We have failed the youth of our communities. We continue to fail because over and over again we got $5 billion worth of work contracted in the city. And we are failing the youth and the citizens of our community. Thank you. Next up is an Elizabeth and I will invite the next five speakers to come to the front. Scott Robson, Darryl Watson. Ian, to for you, Bill Karl and Bart Berger. And Elizabeth, you're up. Members of the Council. I am here to strongly support this text. Some of my comments will be responsive to other folks and I'll ask you to connect the dots. I'm East 50th Avenue and North Washington Street in Globeville. The reason that I support this is because I think there is a maintenance deficit we've recently experienced in in Argo Park over there, an effort to get the water jets fixed and discovered that despite the sincere willingness and availability of folks in the park system to deploy people to do this, there are only two maintenance folks available to to execute the needed repairs. Regarding and I think that what we have here is I understand the potential impact of the use of this money it can through some of the capital expenditures create some improvements. Argo Park certainly can use a bathroom. I've read the very entertaining bathroom master plan for the parks and it's a well done document and I think we can be talking more on that level. I think that the two obstacles that we have found toward toward the bathrooms and the drinking fountain that mean the bathrooms in Argo have been regarding vandalism and the expense for putting in the sewer system. And I think there's ways we can work with this. The favorable way that they use and I agree the camping ban, it would be great to revisit but they use benefits intergenerational homeless within Globeville as an example, we have intergenerational homeless many times. Families are having reunions during the day at the park, even in the evening. This is how they stay in touch. Meet me at the park. We have this program with the city of Denver that is hiring homeless on jobs and eventually leading to more permanent jobs. We certainly are wanting to have when I say we, the miscellaneous numerous conversations I've had with people in my own neighborhood, I don't represent anybody. But anyway, we certainly can look at employing homeless in the parks through relationships with those that are actually our permanent homeless folks who are consistent homeless folks. Also, I think that we can look at the apprenticeships programs as a as an as an affiliated part of this. I would support those sensitivities and those priorities. I don't want this to be an either or with this level of taxation. Our parks do have deficits. And I would ask you to work very closely with parks, have a community community accountability relative to our optimum master planning over time to help us enrich the parks to to recognize that part of the sanity of a city under extreme stress with changes and building environments needs parks systems that are optimized both in the comfortable, the utilitarian comforts, the comforts, meaning bathrooms. And we want to encourage our Elyria and Swansea and neighbors to be coming over to our beautiful developing network of Parks and Parks and Globeville over the next seven years to help with the stress reduction and then the revitalization of their of daily energies and would certainly be wonderful to have this feeling is that your. Time is up. Thank you. Thank you, Scott Robson. Good evening, counsel. Scott Robb Sentiment District ten Resident Congress Park. Thank you for the time on this issue tonight. I'm here to speak in support of this initiative. I serve as the executive director of the Civic Center Conservancy, a nonprofit downtown here, and also had the privilege over a number of years to serve as the director of Denver Parks under Mayor Hickenlooper's administration. So I have seen firsthand the difficulties that this city has without a lack of funding source like is being proposed here tonight to fund the acquisitions and the over $100 million in park maintenance backlog that is necessary for a world class city like us to move forward. I think this bill represents a few things. First of all, I think this help solve inequity issue. The acquisitions that will occur from this funding source on an annual basis will more than likely occur primarily in underserved neighborhoods. And that is where we need to invest our money across this city for the quality of life of our family and children in our most underserved neighborhoods. It also is just a general quality of life answer that we're trying to solve here. We as a city and residents have intentionally helped increase density and growth of this city over time. This bill helps offset that through new park acquisitions, through the the breadth and depth of new parks that we will bring to the city. It helps offset that that density and growth that some of us are feeling a pinch around. And last of all, I think it represents a fair initiative that is at the right level where we stand today. And the point 25 sales tax. It represents a fair level to both citizens and frankly, to those visitors that come to our city, the majority of which pay sales tax. The majority of residents are not taking the burden of sales tax. It is those residents that visit us. And that's a great thing for those of us that live in the city. So I want to let you know that are our board of directors with the Civic Center Park Conservative Conservancy have voted unanimous unanimously in favor of this. That's not something that we take lightly, but we would like to see this move forward. It's long overdue. We've been talking about this in this city for over a decade. And as a world class city, it's time. It's time that we begin to fund our park system in a whole nother way and get to a level that this city deserves our families, our residents and beyond. So thank you for the time tonight. Thank you. Darrell Watson. Good evening, members of council and community members. My name is Darryl Watson. I live at 26th and Lafayette in the beautiful Whittier neighborhood. I am the co-chair of the Denver Game Plan, the 15 year masterplan for Denver Mountain Parks. Denver Parks and Recreation Centers on behalf of the other co-chair, the amazing Florence Navarro, who is not able to be here tonight. We're here to speak in favor of this this bill, the primary opposition that we've heard, the focus has been on the tax rate. Whether this bill will target negative, neglected neighborhoods and communities and whether it aligns with the city's identified higher priorities. I'll hit on each of these within my brief remarks. The 0.25% tax increase places Denver competitively still below at a total tax rate of 3.9% compared to a current tax rate of 3.65%, which is lower than most of our neighboring counties and communities. The game plan process of which I've been involved in over the last 18 months, from its first meeting through now the final meetings of this process, every community outreach, every discussion we've had with community members, they have resoundingly stated that they wanted a dedicated funding source for parks. I've been involved in the parks process for well over 20 years as one of the former presidents of the Parks and Rec Advisory Board. And within that 20 year period, each time each community outreach and process folks have communicated their desire and interest in identifying a dedicated source for parks. Denver And our funding for parks were ranked now 26. We often call ourselves a city within a park. Slowly but surely that is not the case. This plan will align to the city's identified higher priorities of investing in mobility and will have a focus on revitalizing parks and most neglected neighborhoods in the city. I live in Whittier neighborhood. We have five pocket parks. When you exclude Fuller Park, the four other pocket parks that we that we have in Whittier have been not kept up. There are needles. There are broken bottles. The poor children in my neighborhood deserve a parks that they can play in, that they can have birthday parties in . They can enjoy living in Whittier. Every advertisement about the city of Denver. Every rationale for why Denver's a great city is built on this city. Being a city in a park, displacement in affordable housing, all priorities of council. So is reducing non permeable surfaces, increasing air quality and quality of life. This plan will get us to the latter without changing council's and a mayor's office focus on reducing displacement, increasing affordable housing in a great city, in a forward looking city. They all can be done. We are tired of being place in the back of the line. Bringing it to the people of to vote. Finally, it's something that this council is allowing. And we ask you for your support. Thank you. Thank you for interview. Hello. My name is Ian Thomas Tafoya. I'm a resident of LAMB of Lincoln Park in District three. I want to say congratulations. Joe and I had a chance to sit on the park with you. It makes me feel amazing to know that we have a parks advocate leading city council, and I think it's going to be reflected in the choices we make under your leadership. I'm here in support today. I was at the State of the City address and I heard a lot about the city beautiful movement. And 100 years ago, well, today we have another opportunity to seize opportunity to grow our park system. It provides a whole host of issue benefits, including public health. I have been a tireless advocate for public health, and I believe this is an opportunity to build public restrooms and our and that's related to alcohol policy that we're discussing currently. I think it's an opportunity to bring drinking fountains. I was a teacher. I believe children deserve access to water fountains in their parks. I think it's a chance for us to restore and protect our history in our water fountains. You know, most people don't know, but it's the 100th anniversary of the Greek fountain in City Park. I think there's an opportunity to protect those amenities. I think it's a chance to modernize our facilities. The mayor announced he's ready for 100% renewable energy. Solar panels on buildings, I think probably fit into this. I think we've had a conversation around I-70 and air quality. Perhaps it's an opportunity to use this money to improve air quality in the recreation centers. You know, I also want to take a chance and address this equity conversation. And I've been an advocate for a park, a public transit to Red Rocks. I think this ties in to improving the amenities. And if we can get the transit there, we can access it. You know, the arsenal now has transit and we created a little park in between the sliver of land in there and public transit to provide that for people. You know, I want to say, this is an opportunity to buy land. You know, we're not always going to have that opportunity to buy land. Part of a golf course is one. We're out of heights. This one, you know, a few years ago, there was a piece of property here, Soccer River, who was part of the city, beautiful movement. Imagine an entire civic plaza that went from the Platte River all the way to the capital. We missed that opportunity. We don't have to miss that opportunity in the future. You know, we could be like Green Gables and Lakewood where they missed their opportunity to protect a park and instead they haven't. You know, I want to touch on trees and parkways. Parkways and trails. By the way, our transportation, it's not all just about cars. There are people who get equitable transit on a bus. You know, I do think it's a great leveler for the community. Everybody goes and they hang out in the parks. I do think it is connected to housing and density. As we increase density, we need parks. I am in support of impact fees and I'm glad that you ensure this isn't this is a we're doubling down. You're made sure that this isn't money that's going to be taken away from parks in the first place. You know, lastly, I guess I want to talk about some of the concerns. I mean, some of the concerns I've heard are about housing and transportation, which I talked about. But some of the other ones relate to just oversight. And I believe under your leadership, there'll be great oversight. You know, with Denver in her neighborhood cooperation, they've talked about how they'd like to see park oversight invested more in the parks. I hope this doesn't become just a find that you guys are ambivalent to. I'm pretty sure you'll be involved in. And so that's why I'm in support today. Thank you. Next, Bill Carl. Bill, Carl and I actually get to live in a Denver park on top of Lookout Mountain where Buffalo Bill's buried. I'm the concession there. My family has been there since 1956. We've also run the trading post at Red Rocks and currently run the largest echo they come out Evans Tourism Works. And with that, I'm also a member. Of the Denver Mountain Parks Foundation with Under Bar Burger. One of the things that was addressed was training youth to serve in the trades. And one of the things Bart's been working on is the historic core project there at the camp. At Mount Morris. And and every board meeting we have that's mentioned that we would like to develop more. Youth involvement with. Restoration of these parks. I'll give you two things I wanted to say. One is with the parks, how busy they're getting. I've been there all my life at Red Rocks. We used to do about 40 to 45 shows a year. It's well over 120 now on Mount Evans. We used to kind of be by ourselves up there next week. It was kind of lonely. Now, on the weekends, they're lining up from the Bergen Park side and the Idaho Springs side. And you have to you can't even get across the street the power of social media. It's the TripAdvisor reviews. It's the Facebooking at Red Rocks. This is the greatest place I've ever been. These things are going to keep going. And Denver has the best stuff. It was laid out at the beginning that Denver had the best properties west of the west of town, in the mountains. And there's there's parks and land that haven't even been developed yet. And it's going to take some money and. There's never enough of it, of course, but it's going to take some money and the people are coming and they're here this morning just to see the example of how tourism works. My first sale today was $89 at Buffalo Bill, a bunch of T-shirts. The city gets. $8.80 of that. They were here for the Emagine Dragon concert at Red Rocks, which is sold out tonight. It's just this effect of a good place attracting more and more people. We all know what I-70 is like on the weekends. Genesee Park is coming. It's going to be amazing. The Buffalo are going to have a lot of company and it's going to take some money to do that. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, Bart Burger. And then I invite the next five to come up. Jim Peterson, Leslie Talk, Gorski, Jeff Shoemaker, Erica Walker and Fabio Hilliard. Gordon. Thank you, President Clark. That has a ring to it. I'm Bart Berger, cochairman of. The Denver Mountain Parks. Foundation. And, you know, a wise man once said that the time to plant trees is 20 years ago. In the early days of the 20th century, Denver's leaders understood the importance of parks for the quality of life in Denver. Their dedication to creating our parks system is legendary. Moreover, they're their understanding that one of Denver's unique characteristics is its nearness to the cool air and open spaces of the front range foothills. In typical fashion, Denver took the remarkable step to build roads and parks outside of its own boundaries to provide for her citizens something no other city in America could. They created this with a voter approved, dedicated funding source, and the result was a 14,000 acre necklace of parks from Lookout Mountain to Daniel's Park, from Red Rocks to Mount. Evans that are unparalleled in their. Popularity, even if people. Don't know. Much about them. The dedicated funding ceased in 1955, then, only until recently began its long, slow deterioration. Out of out of sight became out of mind. But with the city we are beginning to turn that around. And creating a dedicated funding. Source again for the parks and in particular the Denver Mountain parks once again will honor the legacy that we have been given in the 21st century. We have the opportunity to provide a quality of life and a spectrum of park amenities that, quite frankly, people come here expecting. We dream of a great city, and the great city is equal to the sum of its parks. Denver has a reputation for leadership, creating a dependable, dedicated funding source for Denver's parks. Most certainly the mountain parks is part of that, and this small tax will enable us to do what our citizens already are expecting that we are already doing. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next up, Jim Peterson. Thank you, Mr. President. Counsel I'm Jim Peterson, LAKEWOOD. On behalf of the Trust for Public Lands Denver based Colorado program, I wish to offer a strong endorsement of the bill before you today. The Trust Public Land is a national organization whose mission is to create parks and protect land for people to ensure a healthy, livable communities for generations to come. We have a national vision that every resident will live within a ten minute walk of a quality park. Parks are essential city infrastructure. They are central to our quality of life. I'd like to give you six reasons why Council should approve this measure and give Denver residents the opportunity to make badly needed investments in Denver's parks, trails, trees and open spaces. First, community parks connect people to their neighborhoods, to their city, and to each other. Parks help build strong communities and give local residents the opportunity to celebrate diversity and community identity and heritage. Second, environment parks play a key role in the health of the city's environment. Parks protect natural resources. They help us adapt to a changing climate by providing badly needed shade and absorbing carbon emissions. A robust trail network gets people out of their cars helping protect our air quality and by providing kids with close to home access to nature. Parks help build the next generation of environmental stewards. Third economy parks provide valuable services, including stormwater retention. And helping cool surrounding neighborhoods in the heat of summer parks, boost the city's economy and growth by enhancing our quality of life, which attracts new businesses and workers and helps to retain existing ones. Fourth, health parks provide badly needed close to home opportunities for exercise and connecting to nature. This boosts physical and mental health and well-being. Further parks safeguard clean water and mitigate air pollution. Fifth, inspiration parks enrich our daily lives with beauty and nature. They showcase public art, reflecting the cultures, heritage and character of surrounding neighborhoods, and provide parks, provide a respite from the hustle and bustle of a rapidly changing and growing city. Put simply, Parks nurture the spirit. Which is something we all need in this increasingly busy and overloaded world. And finally, our kids. We need to invest in Denver parks for our kids. Today, the average kid spends 7 minutes outdoors in unstructured play compared to more than 7 hours on screens. In an age where kids can hold in their hands devices that connect them to the world in devices that are designed to distract and hold attention more than ever, we need parks that are close to people's homes and parks that are filled with exciting, interesting and fun amenities. For all these reasons and more. I urge you to support the bill before you tonight. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, Leslie Tartakovsky. Hi. Thank you for having me. My name's Leslie to our Gal Ski, and I currently serve as the president of the Denver Recreation Parks Advisory Board. Councilman Clark, first, I want to congratulate you on your new chair. I when I first met you as a fellow member of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, I knew that you were destined for greatness. So I'm very happy to see you sitting there, but not the least bit surprised. I will be very brief because Mr. Watson touched on most of my points, but a couple of things that have come up, as is the discussion regarding oversight and one of the parts of this bill is annual revision and and oversight by the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board. Equity is one of our most fundamental concerns in the city of Denver, and I think the job that we did. For the geo bond. Getting funding. For Westwood Park or Sanchez GVS recreation centers and funding projects in areas that have been consistently underfunded gives me a lot of hope and confidence that this will absolutely be a great failsafe going forward for this tax. Finally, I want to thank you for not making the decisions yourself, but for putting this in front of the voters , because, yes, I did hear what Mr. SIEGEL said. This is going to be a very, very crowded ballot. But there is nothing more Democratic than having each voter look at their own household budget, decide what is a priority for them and decide what they can afford to vote on. So thank you again for sending this to the voters in their consideration. Thank you. Next up, Jeff Shoemaker. Jeff Shoemaker, proud resident of the Wilshire neighborhood. President Pro tem gilbert. Congratulations. President Clark msh. Members of denver city council. It is a true honor to stand before you this fine evening, this historical, significant evening. A night I've been waiting for for over ten years. And the time has finally come. 35 years ago, Federico Pena was inaugurated as mayor of Denver on the promise of imagining a great city. And three and a half decades later, it is my belief that Denver is indeed on the verge of becoming a great city, but only if we do a greater job of investing in our parks, be they urban or mountain or investing in our waterways. Speedy, the South Platte, the Highland Canal, Cherry Creek, or its other tributaries. These priceless natural resources are at a crisis. Members. You know this you've got the numbers I put before you $400 million of immediate needs right now, today, just to get our park systems and our waterways up to today's standards. And that's not speaking about five years or ten years or 20 years from now. And that's not factoring in the thousands and thousands of people that are coming into this city every single year, in great part because of our parks and our waterways. And you've heard that we are indeed, sadly, the only county in the metro area that does not have a dedicated source of funding for our parks and our waterways. But tonight, this night, you can change that. You can move this measure forward to allow the voters of Denver to decide if they want to take the passion they have for our parks and waterways and back it with their wallets. And it is my humble opinion that if you give the voters that chance, they will respond strongly and overwhelmingly with a yes vote. If you choose to move this measure forward tonight, I promise you two things this very evening. Number one, I will continue to work tirelessly on this measure over the next four months and beyond. And number two, I will initiate every single one of my requests to any and every voter with whom I come in contact with one word. And that word is please. And so in conclusion, Mr. President and members of city council, as I ask all of you one final time, to move this opportunity forward to our fellow Denver citizens. I do so humbly. I do so personally. With my final word. Please. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you. Next up, Erica Walker. Hello. My name is Erica Walker, and I'm with the Denver Mountain Parks Foundation. Thank you so much for taking our comments today. I am strongly in favor of giving Denver citizens the opportunity to vote to increase support for the parks. It's interesting to note that this opportunity has historic precedents. In 1912, Denver voters approved a tax that provided dedicated funding to create the Denver Mountain Parks System for more than 100 years. The Denver bound parks have allowed residents and tourists alike to enjoy some of the most beautiful land in our state. Unfortunately, in 1950s, this funding slipped away, and as a result, the mountain parks declined significantly. But now we have an opportunity to create another dedicated funding source. I believe that we owe it to future generations to take this step today. More than 100 years ago, Denver displayed visionary leadership in establishing the Denver mountain parks. This was three years before our national parks were established and more than 50 years before the Colorado State Parks were established. By restoring dedicated funding to our parks. Now, Denver will be continuing this important legacy of visionary leadership. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next up for Abby Hilliard and I'll ask the last five speakers to come to the front, Kim Wan Farrell, Brandon Routh, Heimer, David Howlett, Katie Fritz and Frank Roe. Go ahead. Thank you very much. Congratulations to you tonight. I'm just here to say thank you. There's never a good time to do something like this. It's I think it's been longer than ten years we've been working on this. But but it is time to take this step and move this forward to the people of Denver to make the decision. I'm a fifth generation Colorado native. We've been in every park, probably in the entire system at some point. And my children and grandchildren continue to enjoy and thrive in these parks. But they're sad and they're tattered and they need our support. So thank you. I am hoping that you will move this initiative forward and I appreciate your bravery in doing this at this time and look forward to working with you all on this. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, can Kim Yuan Farrow. Sorry about. That. No problem. Good evening, counsel. I'm Kim U.N. Farrell. I live at 41st and federal. I'm the director of the Park People. We are a 49 year old nonprofit organization that supports Denver's Parks, Recreation, Resources, open space and urban forest. We have raised millions of dollars for Denver's Parks and Recreation System, capital improvement projects, maintenance projects. Our Denver Digs Trees program has provided more than 50,000 free and affordable trees to Denver residents. We've engaged with many thousands of community foresters, volunteers, residents across our city to make our neighborhoods more livable places. Never in our 49 years has the park people gotten involved in any political issue like this. But this is an issue that is so critical to the health of our park system, to the health of our city, and to the health of our residents that we felt we needed to bring our voices to the cause. We and kind of the collective Denver Parks and Rec, the park people, other allies of the park system cannot continue to plug with our fingers. The leaks in a sinking ship as $127 million in deferred maintenance alone grows by an added $39 million every year. We need to take care of our local parks, our open spaces, our trails, our trees with adequate stewardship and with new investments so that they can continue to take care of us, of our community as our population increases, as traffic congestion worsens, as air pollution increases, as our paved surfaces expand, and as our cities get hotter. These aren't just nice amenities that we want to have. These are critical elements of green infrastructure that we need in order to keep Denver livable. They are critical for individual health, for social and community health, for environmental health, and for economic health, as so many of our speakers have already spoken to, they impact the everyday experiences of our lives, and every person in every neighborhood in Denver should have access to the benefits provided by these resources. It is an equity issue. It is related to housing and transportation. It is all of that and. These are the things that make Denver a great place to live and to work and to play. And we do not have the resources that we need to properly care for them right now. A dedicated funding source for parks and open space has been a discussion that goes back more than a decade in Denver and actions long overdue. It's backwards that Denver is the only county in the metro area that doesn't have a parks and open space tax. Land is being so rapidly developed. There will never be a time like now to acquire more land for parks and open space. It will only get harder and more impossible and our communities will suffer. So please place this funding proposal on the ballot so that Denver residents can decide. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, Brandon Wright timer. Hello. My name is Brandon Wreath Heimer. Congratulations, President Clark on being president. I was the proponent for the Denver Green Roof Initiative, and I'm here today to speak in favor of this bill. I believe the voters should be given an opportunity to vote on this issue. Our parks are severely underfunded. Our green space is rapidly disappearing. The cost of land increases every day and the ash borer is coming, which is something we cannot forget about this bill. If voters pass in November, it would do a huge service for the future of Denver. We're the only metropolitan city in the area to not have an open space or parks tax. And the quarter percent that's proposed would place us in the middle of jurisdictions and surrounding counties. I strongly urge all of you to allow the people of Denver the opportunity to vote on this in the fall. And just to be clear to those who oppose this, this is just a question for the ballot. This isn't set in stone. I believe we should always let the people vote. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, David Hallett. President, Clerk and member of the Denver City Council. My name is David. I'm a Denver resident. I want to thank you tonight for this opportunity to speak this evening on the proposed park funding bill. The park funding bill will provide much needed funding to address the demands of a city experiencing rapid population growth. The need for the additional 46 million in annual funding is important to ensure that Denver is providing amenity for all of its residents. The additional 46 million would help Denver leverage other funding opportunities, including public and private, nonprofit and foundation sources, thus increasing total funding amounts on a yearly basis. Denver's parks, open space, waterways and related needs have clear public support for increased funding, according to recent surveys. The Parks funding bill is broad based and aligns with the city's mobility priority, the city's goal for improved water quality, achieving fishable and swimmable waterways, rivers and streams, and providing access for all Denver residents to new and existing parks , open space, pedestrian and bicycle trails and mountain parks, as well as addressing social justice needs and enhancing environmental education opportunities. I urge the Denver City Council to place the funding proposal on the November six, 2018 ballot to increase the sales and use tax by 0.25% for parks and related needs. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, Kate Fritz. Name is Kate Fritts. I am a Denver resident. District eight. I am the co-chair of the. Did you pull the microphone? I'm sorry, I'm short. I'm the co-chair of the Denver Mountain Parks Foundation. First off, I'd like to thank council for bringing this matter to the voters. It is a tremendously important step, I think, forward to protect a cultural resource within the city that is unique and special and provides an amazing opportunity for its residents. I would like to also thank you very much for specifically including the Denver Mountain Parks, which are 14,000 acres of opportunity that I think is unique to any city in the country. We are special and our park system is special because we have these parks and it makes us different and they are important. What is unfortunate is that all too often access to open space for so many people is restricted to their ability to afford to get out of the city. What this bill does, it gives the voters in Denver the opportunity to just say, no, we want to have these opportunities within the city and to close in mountains. It says we want this access to be available for everyone who lives here. Not simply the people who have access to cars and can get on I-70 and go to the mountains. It says, we will invest in the infrastructure of this city because it is important for kids and for people who can't afford to do that. To be able to have parks that aren't broken, that aren't full of needles and that aren't trashed, to have shelters and historic structures in the mountain parks that link Denver's present and its future to its past, that give an opportunity to the citizens to see and understand why Denver is unique. Why it is special. What this bill does is that it lets the voters in Denver step up and say, this is important to us, and it's important not just if you have privilege. It's important to everyone because it should be a level playing field to have an outdoor opportunity. It should be a level playing field to be able to go to the mountains and have access to open space on hiking and fishing and mountain biking, or just standing in a stand of pine trees or aspen trees and understanding that when you do, your heart rate drops and when you do, you understand the beauty and you can go back to your life. That is why this is important. That is why I thank you very much for your support and referring this to the voters so that they can make this decision to invest in their city, both the parks within it and the parks outside of it. So thank you very much. Congratulations on your election. I appreciate it. Thank you. And I believe our last speaker is no longer here, but as Frank Rose here. Looks like not. All right. That concludes our speakers. Are there questions from members of council? Councilman Flynn. Thank you, Mr. President. Zach, could you come up and and take a few questions on something we discussed a couple of weeks ago? I think when this went through my committee and that is under the section 39 to 23 I'm sorry, section 39 to 24 on the fund itself. Paragraph F, maintenance of effort. One of my concerns about this, and I think a lot of the concerns that folks expressed is that this new source of revenue not replace or supplant current effort in the general fund budget for parks. And reading the words in the bill now. I'm not sure that it reflects what I had expected to see. So I'm wondering if you could explain how this would work. I had thought that the maintenance of effort would be set at 2018 funding levels in the general fund and that we would not have the general fund at least go below that level. But tell me how this would work when this new revenue can be used for all the things we're doing now out of the general fund, how will we prevent and how will we monitor from year to year that this new money doesn't end up replacing the money we're now spending? I thank you for your question, Councilman Flynn. A couple of things here. The moneys are still used for the prescriptive uses, so you can't just supplant anything in the general fund. It was sort of it was under it was then the five buckets up in section eight is is common in legislation. Sometimes it's taken out. We went with it, not prescriptive. RO If you remember with the state when the recession, if you have a prescriptive amount and the maintenance of effort, you end up with this ratchet effect. And so this would allow the manager of finance to lower the threshold if there was a recession and the general fund shrunk by that same percentage. Okay. Explain to me again, though, paragraph eight, the number of there's five prescriptive uses, but they all seem to be uses that we now find out of the general fund in particular, what caught me was developing, improving and maintaining new and existing parks. We maintain existing parks out of the general fund. How are we if we can maintain existing parks at this new fund, how are we preventing it from replacing that current effort? Sure. So these do exist within the current general fund. However, there are additional expensive expenditures within the parks and recreation budget, such as recreation that would not be allowable under these expenditures. Not allowable. Okay. All right. Thank you. Councilman Lopez. Thank you, Mr. President. I wanted to ask you, I mean, in in the crafting of the language and the communication with both folks in the community advocates and. Parks and Rec. What I want to address the issue of equity. I had comments were served later and I'll say that for them, but I want to make sure. Denver is very lopsided in terms of its park system and where the acreage is and where it is not. And, you know, it's been a lot of fighting and scraping and politics just to get receive a little bit of that equity. How are we sure what mechanisms are in place in here to make sure that that continues to be the case if we are going to. Contribute every single one of us into this is pot. So we can actually make sure folks live within a mile of any park. What mechanisms and policies are in place to make sure that happens. So, Councilman, I think there are two provisions in this bill that would address that. One is reporting requirements. So every year the manager of Parks Recreation will report back to council on the expenditures of that year. If there's something that the Council feels that is not an approved measure, they can take action at that point. The Manager of Parks Recreation will also need to submit within a year the five year outlier of what they anticipate expenditures are, and I'm sure the Council to weigh in on those. They'll be every five years after that there's a typical five year capital improvement plan. So at the end of the day, we are saying, I'm sorry. I just wanted to jump in. Councilman Locke, as you know, from from the very beginning of the drafting, for me, that was hugely important. My district is a tale of two cities and that I come all the way right up to Washington Park on one side, and I go all the way to federal and Tennessee, where we have a strip that if you look at any map of Denver parks, it shows a strip of parks down Tennessee. And if you drive down there, it is nothing but weeds. And there is a huge inequity in our city. I've spent my entire life before I came to this, taking kids from all of these communities on field trips to the river and trying to connect them with our parks. And and I think that the problem is that we struggle to keep up with our parks and to deliver on those parks. And it's a fundamental tenet of why, when I was helping with the drafting this came for it was to make sure that it doesn't matter where you're born, how much money you make, what zip code you live in. You should have a world class park that you can safely walk to. I was very lucky growing up in Denver that, you know, I got to grow up four blocks away from Wash Park and that was my backyard. And every single kid should have that opportunity. And we need the funds to make sure that we do so. That is, you know, a fundamental importance for me and why this is bringing forward so that we have the money to deliver on that dream for everyone. I also, you know, because you brought up some of the comments that are brought up and, you know, I won't for a second say that we don't have to absolutely do everything that we can. And I was encouraged by what the mayor had to say in his speech today about preventing and providing resources for displacement and gentrification . But I think we have to be very careful to before we go down a track where we start saying we shouldn't invest in these neighborhoods because that's a side effect. We need to cure that side effect. I don't think at any point for you, Councilman, as we were going through the bond process, if someone had said, no , let's not invest in a rec center in Westwood, because because there might be some displacement and some gentrification. I think we all and I won't speak for everyone, but it's my hope that we all would have jumped and said, no, let's solve that problem. Let's not make investments. Not, Oh, it's not. Stop paving roads and building sidewalks and building parks. Everyone deserves that. So I don't know if that gets to the question you're asking or not. You know, it does speak to the spirit in which you've drafted in. And I just hope I mean, I know that I'm here for another year as a councilman to see that a strong majority of the council and future councils do believe and continue and have and protect the pillar of equity. I mean, I like that it comes back here because sometimes it's like like other agencies, it can become a tool and it can be a tool that the executive branch and I want to make sure that we at this that this fund is not just an animal that lives in the executive branch, but it also lives within with multi with the legislative and executive. So that we do have a whatever the makeup of this council in any any kind of council in the future become that that equity is a certainty and that that stops at least here. So I appreciate that. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Zach. Councilman Espinosa. Ex-Im Think you can try these, Zach? But they might be for Scott. And it's more for my comments later on. What are the number of parks that we have in the city and county of Denver? That is definitely not free. Looks like Scott Gilmore is here. And can come up. Scott Gilmore, deputy executive director of Parks and Recreation. Approximately 260 parks, 6000 acres. That is in the metro area and the city and county of Denver. Then we have an additional 40 plus parks in the mountains that make up the mountain park system, and that's an additional 14,000 acres. And those are in five different counties. And I know that you have all these statistics in your head, so I like hearing them. This one less of a statistic. Do you have any sense about what the wait list is for playgrounds, parks that are sort of have aging playgrounds but need them? No. I mean, I could get the information. I don't want to give you anything that's not accurate. I mean, we are working down our list of priorities. We have a we did a master plan for playgrounds probably around eight years ago. And we are working through that list to identify the we identified the playgrounds that were in the worst condition. And we have been working through that list, replacing those playgrounds as we move down the list. But that that is. Would you say that I mean, might get you in trouble? Is it moving at the rate it is necessary? No, it's available. Okay. And are there any do we have any prospective parcels with immediate with no immediate plans for development as a park. Yeah. I mean, we have we have land that we are holding that we do not have funding to build parks on. We do have land in Stapleton. We have land in far northeast Denver, Green Valley Ranch Park Field. We have some areas we probably in the far northeast, we probably have about 40 acres of land that we do not have funding to build park land. There's additional acreage in Stapleton and there are some other parcels throughout the system that Jolan has a park in his neighborhood. I think it's the car dealership parcel that is nothing. So we have ample need for this. Yes, we do. Great. Thank you. Okay. Anything else, Councilman? No, thanks. Councilman Cashman. Yeah. Thank you, Sack. Simple one. So at this point, two 5% on a $10 purchase, that equates to what I believe it's a quarter. On a $10 purchase. It's 2.5 cents. Believe. Thank you. Anything else, Councilman Cannick. Thanks, Mr. President. Congratulations. A couple questions. My first one is about maintenance. And I think this kind of gets at the question that Councilman Flynn was asking about folks. We're talking about things like cleaning up needles and stuff. I think of that as like a maintenance person doing a service in a park. I guess I have the impression from our conversation that we were talking about hard maintenance, i.e. capital, like I'm painting, appealing, retaining while I am maintaining a an area that has soil erosion. And I was thinking that we were more in the capital maintenance realm than the services maintenance realm. And so I couldn't find a definition in the ordinance of maintenance specifically. So I just if someone could help kind of, you know, whether that's in the city attorney's office, but just can you clarify what your intent is? And then let's check to see if the language matches intent. Yeah. Do you want to speak to the language or. Okay. So, you know, on intent, the the the number one intent was to make sure that this was new money and back to what Councilman Flynn had brought up. It is not a lock in where we're in the general fund right now because we did just very recently have a recession that every department, including police and fire, were asked to cut. And it wouldn't be fair. I felt and other members were helping with drafting to say, oh, parks doesn't have to cut because of this money . Outside of that, it has been left fairly broad. And so I would say that while the focus is on catching up with deferred capital maintenance, there was especially a concern with bringing new parks on and with the, you know, things like emptying the trash cans. I told the story in committee that I had constituents who started picking up the trash in the park and were putting it in the trash and called me and said, Hey, can we pick up the trash can more often? Because that same trash is just blowing out and we didn't have the resources to empty those trash cans. So, you know, I'm not sure what the the legal read on that is, but my the intent would be that that's part of the plan. And if at any point this body or proud felt that it was an inappropriate use of those funds, but certainly if there is a park that is not being used and is not safe and accessible for kids, I didn't feel that we should expressly prohibit our Parks Department from saying for this park, that's the need for that park over there. It's a bench that's broken. And for this one, it's a playground. And here it's that they don't have a park and we need to buy land. But for this park, the thing that we need is another person and it is not explicitly prohibited unless the legal interpretation is different. Okay. Kirsten Crawford, Legislative Counsel I would suggest that we do not need to define maintenance in the ordinance, that it's a commonly used term for actually maintenance separate and distinct from capital improvements, which are also covered in the bill. Okay. Okay. Thank you. I appreciate that clarification. Second question actually was for you, Kirsten. One of the speakers early on asked the question about, you know, we that we couldn't do anything to change this. And, you know, obviously under TABOR, we need voter approval to increase the tax. I'm just curious about what are the mechanisms for adjustment. So, for example, if if it turned out that tax burden became an issue or, you know, is there what is council's authority and or would it be referred to the ballot like could voters change the amount, for example? So I just wanted to get clarification since someone asked that. So with respect to adjusting the tax, the TABOR requires that a policy change in tax that results in an increase must be approved by the voters. But you all could adjust it lower without a vote necessary without a vote. Or we could refer for voters to weigh in if that was it. Nothing prohibits us from asking the voters about an adjustment in the future. That's right. Okay. That's helpful. Thanks. Councilman Clark, I wanted to ask you a couple of questions, and I will acknowledge they're not they're not just in the vein of technical questions. I think it's like, you know, we had a lot of policy concerns that were raised. And so could you just speak a little bit to your consideration of a sunset? Not a lot of questions about sunsets. Yeah, a lot of questions about that. It was something that, you know, I thought about. I you know, I think as we've been going through the affordable housing, we've learned that there are ramifications to having a sunset. And that limits what we do in some of our suburban neighbors have taken parts of their dedicated sources of revenue and said land will never be cheaper. We should bond on that land. And so I felt that, one, it gave freedom for us to really look at what do we need? Part of the problem is we've never had the money or any future promise of that money to really look at what do we need from a land standpoint? Land can be very expensive, especially when we have such a big deferred maintenance, annual problem and hole. So, you know, I think that was part of it. And I also, you know, I believe that the need for us to make sure that every person has a quality park will not end. And so fundamentally, I felt like that I also, as we've seen through both green roofs and social consumption, this council's not been afraid to jump in and fix things when they're fixed. And, you know, I'll say that the day that every single, you know, person in this city has a high quality world class park that they can walk to safely, that is that is kept at the level that our citizens want. And we don't need this any more than I'll be the first one in line up there to say, Hey, it's time to make a change. I just don't think at the where where we're at and what this level is. There's also a lot about is this too much? The problem is, if it's not this much, then we can't even start the conversation about acquiring land in those park deserts, in those communities that don't have that safe walk. And so I felt like this was the minimum amount to even get us on track, and we shouldn't sunset that perhaps down the road. Many communities have looked at increasing their taxes beyond their .25 to Jefferson County with 0.5, Boulder with 0.6. And perhaps when you look at we've got our house in order and we've started to grow, but we hit the next wall. That might be appropriate in that conversation. But we're so far behind and we've let this go on so long that I didn't feel that it was appropriate or responsible to sunset this. Another thing that was another question that was raised, and I think what I heard from folks is that there are people who are in this realm of of parks and open spaces, their focus and passion, who feel like they've been part of a conversation for a decade. For many others in the community, this proposal came as a surprise. They were not at that table. They did not feel like they were part of that debate. And so what can you share about what other sources that you or others that you worked with thought about? So what made the sales tax the right source, for example, as compared to a development impact fee, which has sometimes been thrown around by the community? So. You know, I'd said and I've, you know, said this and as people have asked me this over email too, that there's no tax that is a perfect tax and that it should never be taken lightly to increase any of those taxes. There are bad parts of all of them. Part of it was looking at where can we model after best practices? Where can we learn from and not invent something new that might have ramifications? Every single one of our neighboring counties has this as a sales tax. There is a clear roadmap. There are organizations like the Trust for Public Lands who have helped multiple jurisdictions craft those, work on those, go back and make edits to those. So it was the pool where we could learn very quickly how to do this effectively. Development impact fees. You know, if you look at the amount and again, how much do we need to generate? We need to we need to stop the annual gushing of resources where we're getting further and further behind. We need to start catching up on the stuff that we are already behind and then we need to deliver on acquiring new properties as Denver is growing as fast as they can and development impact fees would have had to have been so much bigger than what we did for, say, affordable housing to generate the kind of money that we need. And that was a difficult conversation to get through. So that was one that, you know. Looking at again, I think it was lessons learned, best practices. And then how realistic is it to actually generate the money that we need to solve this problem from each thing? You know, some of the other things that were considered was there have been we've talked a lot about property taxes. We've we've re-upped the job on, which wasn't necessarily a tax increase but certainly was more taxes on people would have had to pay had they not. We have activated some property tax for affordable housing. And as we talk about housing, not that all of this isn't connected and everything you have to pay for goes into that. But with a sales tax in Denver, only 24% of that is paid by Denver residents. And so the burden on the Denver residents was also something that was seen as a plus of the sales tax. I guess I wanted to just clarify two questions. And, you know, Kirsten or Jolene. So, one, you had mentioned bonding. So if we had used a different source, like a development impact fee, just refresh me again. Could we have bonded against that if that's something folks wanted to do to build a park? I am not. Generally told she was not available for bonding in the affordable housing realm. So I just want to confirm that that is my understanding. But we haven't I haven't looked at that issue. Okay. Got it. And again, this just gets to we are in some ways today having the policy debate right about the why this source. Last question, I guess is about the timeline. So refresh me again with the latest date. This could be referred in order to kind of be on the ballot. It is. So we're on first reading tonight. Yes, we're actually in final reading. To final reading. Okay. Correct. Sorry. Sorry. So I think the early the latest would be, I believe, September 9th, that needs to be in by September 9th. Okay, great. Thank you very much. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilwoman Ortega. Thank you. I have several questions as well. And Scott, maybe you might want to work your way up here. I'm going to ask a few other questions first, but I do have one for you as well. And Councilwoman Canete, you asked a couple of my questions, but I want to elaborate on them a little further. So on the. So let me let me start with the issue of somebody made reference to being able to maybe use these dollars for recreation facilities as well. And I want you to clarify whether or not these dollars can actually be spent on capital improvements for recreation center buildings. No, they cannot. Okay. I just wanted to make that really clear. So any adjustments that might be made in the future, could recreation facilities be added without having to go back to a vote of the people? I'm looking at you to help answer that question. Uh uh, yes, absolutely. I, I guess I would have to go back and look at whether there's a time frame on that. But, yeah, you could do it without a vote. Okay. Thank you. Um, on the issue of equity, I just wanted to ask Scott if you wouldn't mind coming to the microphone for a minute. What what are the standards that exist? Because as I travel around the city, I see a drastic difference in the quality of maintenance of our parks. Depending on what neighborhood you happen to be in across the city. Is is there a standard of maintenance that exists for the maintenance of our parks? Yes, there. Is a standard of maintenance that we we definitely try to meet. Some of it's based on the use of the park. It's based on the size of the park. It's based on if it's a community park, neighborhood park or a regional park. We we strive to make sure that all our parks are maintained at a high level. So as everyone knows, if there is parks that you see that are not maintained at a at a level that is appropriate. You can always reach out to the Parks Department. You can reach out to me directly, and we will address that. I have one more for you. And this is on. It's how we. Set priorities for. Looking at where we. Prioritize the spend of resources. So, for example, we'll be able to utilize these dollars along some of our R River corridors. As you know, we've been trying to address some flooding issue in the Globeville neighborhood. But if we had, for example, Ilitch is say, well, we want to have some of that address next to our site because we're in a floodplain. And as we look at redoing, you know, a whole new development for that site, we'd like the city to pony up some some of these new dollars to address some of the flooding in in that area. So how would we prioritize Globeville over an Ilitch project, for example? To be honest, I do not know the specific answer to that question. So I'm not going to try to give you an answer that I don't know. All right. Thank you. That's it for you. I appreciate you answering that question. Let me go on to my next question, and this is on me a second here. So I think Councilwoman Kenny asked the question about bonding. On kind of why the sunset was not said is you you address councilman Clark to be able to potentially create the opportunity for bonding. I guess we need to get that clarified. And I'm I'm not comfortable with us just moving this forward tonight without really knowing the answer to that question, because I think if it potentially impacts our bond rating, if if we begin to kind of reach that ceiling on our bond indebtedness, that would be a concern, because if we then find ourselves having to deal with some kind of unforeseen emergency that we have to issue debt for, but we're at our ceiling. Are we? You know, I think that's something we always need to be cognizant of and take a very careful look at. So I would like for us to be able to get the answer to that question, I think. I'm sorry. Can you clarify what exactly your question is around the bonding? It's if this fund that would be created, if the voters pass it, if the dollars can be used to bond. And we want to do that up front, similar to what we're going to do with our housing money. Have we taken that big picture, look at our debt capacity in the city and ensured that we're not bumping up to that ceiling on, you know, being unable to address unforeseen future emergencies that might exist. There's nothing in this bill that says it has to be or would be bonded that would become for or have to come forward as part of the plan. Or the Parks Department would say, this is what we need to do. And that would then have to go through the whole process, including council approval, before we could go through that. So and the question was around sorry, the question was around the sunset and why not have a sunset? So I guess, you know, I had arguments. Beyond just it limits our ability to ever consider that why I didn't include a sunset but there's nothing in here that says we will bond against it now would have to come through. And I guess for me it would be helpful to know, number one, can these dollars be bonded? Because if they cannot, then maybe there's no reason to not have a sunset at some, you know, time set into the future. So for me, knowing the answer to that question would be extremely helpful. It is. And again, for me, that was one piece of a sunset answer. But it is my understanding that any revenue source for the city that is predictable, you can't it's harder to bond against the total capacity of a sales tax because it goes up and down. But certainly taking a portion of that would be eligible to use for bonding. But I don't know, Kristen, if there's something that I misunderstood. So, Councilwoman Ortega, we will take a look and get you an answer. I know this was fully vetted with finance, and so I'm sure if that was a concern that they would have voiced it. But we will get you that answer after tonight very quickly. Okay. And then the last question I have is about. How we make decisions. And I don't know where this gets done, if it's done in the mayor's office or if it's done at our finance department or our Parks Department, where we have large developments in this city that we require, they do, you know, a percentage of their development as open space and, you know, where they are very large. Sometimes we get some fairly decent sized parks, but what happens is they develop the park and after a year they turn them over to us. And then we assume that maintenance responsibility. Yet in the projects that include metro districts, they include maintenance as part of their overall development. And I'm assuming the parks are part of that. But yet we, the taxpayers and the City General Fund assumes that maintenance responsibility. And yeah, I raise this every time we have these big projects, but we never really have a policy discussion around whether or not we should continue to assume that maintenance responsibility or whether those developments should pay their own way in maintaining those parks that are built within their in their development. And is there anyone that can address where that policy decision is made that we just assume those parks? I mean, one great example of that is the little over I-70 that's going to be the playground for the elementary school. I mean, I understand Parks and Rec didn't really even get to weigh in on that decision of assuming that responsibility. I'm not even sure you guys are are up to the task of doing that. But it was part of the idea that got brought forward to this body of council that that's a commitment that was made that Denver is going to maintain what is a cedar asset, which makes no sense to me at all. So is there anyone that can answer that question about how the policy discussion is made around whether we accept these these parks that we require to be built as part of these developments? Councilwoman, I'm not sure if I understand your full question, but I do want to say that I think this is all done, as you mentioned, on a case by case basis. I don't know that Parks has an overarching policy on how this is hand over if it's a small park, if it's a see that project? Director Haines, do you have anything you want to add to this? Good evening. Happy Haines, executive director of Denver Parks and Recreation. Thank you for the question, Councilwoman. And as I said, it does often happen on a case by case basis. The the requirement for open space generally comes out of a planning process, a general development plan that requires a 10% open space requirement. And that can happen in a number of ways, including the dedication of land for a dedicated park that could become a dedicated city park or just an open space. And in some of those instances that could they could be maintained by the private development. So every every one of those cases is unique. I will say this. If the park or if the land is dedicated as a park, it becomes one of ours and we assume the maintenance of it. That doesn't preclude, however, additional agreements with entities around maintenance of those or additional maintenance for those park facilities. By the city or by the. Developer, either by the development or a metro district in this case. So there could be separate agreements for maintenance in any of those parks. Okay. Thank you. I have no further questions at this time. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman Brooks. Thank you, Mr. President. You look good up there, by the way. I have some questions, and I think, you know, Councilman Ortega answer or get a chance to ask some of them around equity. And, and I think there's a lot more conversation around that. Um, but, but I'll just go in the interest of time, just a prioritization and strategy. And, you know, I just want to hear a little bit about. The prioritization of this bill in front of us today. And I know that there's other groups that have been working on it. The Parks Parks Group has been working on this in game plan. But as far as conversations at the city council, 11 level, four hour prioritization, help me understand how you're working on that and include the executive branch as well. And I'm sorry, are you talking about prioritization against non park priorities or prioritization in the completion. Of this bill going through City Council and other priorities that. Prior to terrorizing it and making sure that we support it. You know, like we're working on this for a while. But not the not the difference of priorities within the bill you're talking about done right. This bill. Yeah. All the other issues. And you know, this is a conversation that I have had with the administration since the first day I was elected or the first time I got a chance to talk directly to the mayor. You know, again, I spent 17 years of my life working in Denver parks every single day. And not for the public sector, not for the city. But I got to see firsthand what was happening on the ground floor. I served on the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board with a lot of the great people, came today for a number of years before I came here. And I've also been on the the game plan task force. And, you know, this conversation about this dedicated stream has always been a huge priority. It's always been in the white paper. It's always been in game plan. You know, I don't I don't know. To be fair, I don't know that this council has sat down and gone through it. We just now had Jerry Donato come and present in committee on what the priorities, what our goals even are in the sustainability sphere. And so I think that there is a lot going on and we govern over a lot of different things. And I don't know that this council has had specifically this conversation, but the community has and those the game plan document, the blueprint document, those are all that go out to the community. Now, not every member of the community participates in all of those conversations are certainly people who participate in all the parks ones and haven't been participating in our conversations about transportation mobility or about housing. But those are public documents that have public meetings and have a stakeholder group just like the rest of our plans. And this is in those adopted plans from the city. Now, all of that aside, you know, sometimes, you know, we could sit and say, okay, let's take everything that we need to do and let's put them in 1 to 5000 order. And sometimes you look at where the opportunities are. And Brandon, who's here today, was the one who was galvanizing a group of citizens to put this on the ballot in November. And when we first started talking about that, he was going to go similar to what he did with green roofs and draft something, put it on the ballot and we could deal with it afterwards. But he was very, very receptive to sitting down and talking through this, to working with our legislative staff to do the research behind it, to put forward working with the trust for Public Lands, who's done this in multiple municipalities and say, okay, here is an adopted goal and vision of the city and we're going to do it, but very willing to work with us on it. And then we got to a crossroads, at which point he said, I'm Vaughan, we're going to go start getting signatures. Or if you all would like to take this through the council process, then I will defer to you working it through your process. Similar to there's another measure that is potentially on the ballot that I believe there's a meeting later this week to have that same conversation. Is that item that's coming forward something that was, you know, next in line for this council to take action on? Well, or do we take an opportunity to have input on something that is an adopted goal of our city? And, you know, I think certainly a priority. So I think it was a combination of those things. That's part of what led to a truncated, you know, process specifically around this bill. You know, if we could say, hey, let's do this this bill just like this, then it's a little bit different. But we had an opportunity to be involved in a process or not be involved in the process. We had the experts who have crafted this for other jurisdictions, and we do have all of the people who do participate and do show up to private meetings and do show up to game plan meetings and do fill out those surveys, not just the blueprint Denver ones and who have been asking for this and working on this and begging for this. And that was my world. That was the community that I came from. And so, yeah, it is unfortunate that we are it's really hard to have every conversation with everybody, but I wouldn't discount that this community that has been working on this, you know, I sat with Bart Berger when we first were looking at this, and he pulled out presentations that the community had put together from 20 years ago, from 15 years ago, from ten years ago, from five years ago. But nobody on this council, they could never convince anyone on this council to give the voters that choice. They had done everything from polling and been ready to go, couldn't convince the administration or council to take it on. And so I think, you know, that was the the underlying conversations that were going on in the framework that this came from. Does that answer your question? Yeah, yeah, yeah. It's a lot there. A lot. And I actually appreciate because I think I think I heard something that I hadn't heard before. And it was, you know, Brandon in the community group as the impetus to speed this up which jumps. I'll leave that for comments, but that's helpful. Let me ask you this, Mr. President. And this is the thing that I'm concerned about. One of the things nine out of ten people say driving in their car. Mobility is the if not most important issue with housing. It is. And and our sales tax is at a place right now where we can take advantage of funding items. And you are totally taking advantage of this with the with the parks, which I appreciate. Do you think about because I know that mobility is really important to you, $1,000,000,000 for sidewalks in the future? You know, I think we're $800 million for bike lanes all over the city if we want to get there. Do you think that this tax will the opportunity costs in the future will limit us from taking advantage of future opportunities in a year from now? I don't believe so. I will also qualify with that with I am I can't see the future and I can't read the future. But I believe that Denver voters are very smart. I think that they weigh everything that's put in front of them and we'll see what they think about this. I think this is a good solution to a problem that's being asked for. And I think that this is something that voters want us to put in front of them. But I don't believe so. I believe voters right now and our citizens in Denver are eager for us to put in front of them solutions to the problems , to the things that they're asking for. And I think that they would be willing to pay more than we expect if those are good solutions that come out of this process that we can put in front of them. So, no, I don't. I also, you know, I was councilman's husband and I sat on the Mayor's Mobility Action Committee. And through that process, there were over 20 possible funding streams that were identified during the year of mobility to take advantage for mobility. I hope we will start moving on those. Only one of those in that bailiwick was sales tax. And so I also don't think that we have to tie all of our future needs to this one. You know, a year ago, all we were doing was talking about property taxes. Now we're talking about sales taxes. I think there are other opportunities. But I personally no, I don't believe that this prohibits us from those other priorities. I agree with you, Mr. President, that the Denver voters are smart. And that's why I'm I'm concerned for the for future. Let me just ask Scott Gilmore, one. There you are. You said something that around the equity of maintenance of parks. And I just wanted to chime in on this. You said. Part of kind of the algorithm to see who gets kind of taken care of is use use of parks. And the thing that made me a little nervous about that is sometime in our neighborhoods, especially the pocket parks, especially in northeast Denver, the parks are so bad . Why would anybody use them? Because they have needles and everything around. So your analysis around use of parks. So it's based on a standard that our department has come out with are our parks team. Some of that standard, what I meant was the type of park more, say, a natural area type park, a more natural park based on versus more a more urban type park. So those parks are definitely at a higher maintenance level than a more natural park that you would just maybe walk through to to look at wildlife. Great. Okay. That's helpful. Thank you. Councilwoman Sussman. Well, thank you, Mr. President. Going from the general to the specific about priorities in the ordinance, it has a list of ways in which the moneys can be spent. Would you please talk about is are these the priorities that the group would use to decide how the money would be spent? That is, the acquiring of lands is number one. And the developing and improving and maintaining existing parks is second. And would you please describe who is going to make the decisions about how this money is going to be spent? Yeah, we I'd like to have some clarification about that. So to answer your first question, Councilwoman, the or the rank order number there, it's not a rank order, which is how follows in the DRC, a paragraph different would have been ABCD. They're not rank order. They are all equal priorities. As far as the bill is concerned, the second question is the manager of Parks Recreation. They have their experts on staff. They know the park priorities. That's why the the parab rab, the person advisory board and the Manager of Parks Recreation will have control of this fund with approval from Council on the plans. And to clarify, I did work with the administration to clarify that this money will be budgeted through the annual budget process every year. So we will participate in that through our budget hearings so that parks can have one unified budget. And we don't end up with certain parks that were bought with the new money and are getting a higher level of something, a two tier system. So certainly not in priority order, but also it will be part of the budget season and then the required report out to Parab and to us on top of the budget, how we how we normally budget our dollars for showing accountability of how the money was actually spent and then a five year plan that is renewed every five years talking about how the how the funds, what are the priorities, how are they going to meet the intent of this ordinance over the next five years through the expenditures are additional on top of through the budget process. Okay. This was one of the concerns that you as you heard, too, from some groups about how they are going to prioritize. So let me just make sure I understand the answer to the questions. When you're going to spend this money, all the priorities have the same value. But of course, once you spend money, you're going to have to start creating priorities. We need this, we need this. We need this is it is the order of those criteria going to be left to the Parks and Rec and to the, uh, for, say, a proposal to parab and, and then a proposal to the city. I mean, oh, is that going to run through? I wouldn't say that they're all considered equal because there may be a bigger need or an opportunity that arises. So it allows the flexibility to not say 10% goes zero, 20% goes here. And then the 10% wasn't enough to do something or to provide, you know, uniform maintenance across the system. So they will be based on the need and the priority. And that need and priority in year one may be very different than that need and priority in year ten. And so it also allows the flexibility to adapt that with the you have to show us how you did that every year in real dollars and you have to show us the vision for what are those needs as we see them over the next five. Okay. Because the answer was that they were equal priority. So I was this particular is 5%. Down the line is right no priority is more important on in the as written than any of the others. That they're situational. The priorities are. Absolutely. They're not they're not written here. Right. All right. Thank you very much. Councilman Espinosa. You're back up. Yeah. He sort of wanted to. Well, I. You said a few questions for you since we're asking a lot of the sponsor. Where where do we rank? Again, it was sort of mentioned how we rank among our surrounding counties. So I know you've done a lot of legwork in in trying to get to the point where you would support, sponsor and carry this measure. And I'm happy to co-sponsor it with you as well. But you did all this work. So where do we rank among our neighboring counties? So just on dedicated sales tax, Douglas County is a 0.17. Jefferson County has 2.5. Boulder is a 0.6. And every other county is 0.25. On top of that, there are additional jurisdictions and cities that are not combined city and county like we are, that also have either a dedicated sales tax or another impact fees on top of that. So because it's hard to get an apples to apples comparison of Denver as a combined city and county, what's included if you pull up in this bill in the system as a comparison that is just off of sales tax and some I'm sorry, some of them use that exclusively for acquisition. And then you did some research on Pierce Cities as well, not just our local areas, but other cities that we love to compare ourselves to our peer cities. And what are they doing? So what what did you find there? And I will ask Jim Peterson from CBO if you wanted to. I don't know if you know those slides. The slides are in your deck. They're presented in committee. But they do take us and compare us to Boston and Chicago. And so I can't remember what they all are in terms of per acre, of parks, per person, amount spent per person out of the budget on parks, percent of population living in a ten minute walk to a park, all of those metrics. So there are some specific pure city comparisons in there which do show that we are behind the eight ball. But I think all of that gets aggregated into this park score that the Trust for Public Land and a phenomenal tool on their website where you can pull up any city that you can think of, pull it up and it will show you the map. They'll show you the areas that aren't within that walk. And so, you know, in the last just, I think eight years, we've dropped from being ranked seventh to 28th, 26th. So from seventh the 26, because of the growth with the growth that we're experiencing, we're not keeping up. So, you know, I think you captured it well in saying that in a nutshell, we're behind the eight ball. And in other comments I've heard you make tonight in responses to questioning, you're under no illusion that even this level of investment will, will, will ever sort of fill fully correct course. You're hopeful and you would be happy to see this. You know, future councils address this, ask if it becomes prudent at a later date to remove it. But but at the same time, the reality is, is that if the city grows, we're still behind. Yeah. I believe that this is the lowest amount that we could put in front of voters and realistically say that this has a chance to fix the problem and we can't predict the future and future growth. But if we had done this ten years ago, if we'd done this 20 years ago, that's a different amount. But with as far as we are behind as as as much as that is growing every year and with the growth that we're experiencing, I think this is the lowest amount that we could put in front of voters and say that we could solve this problem. And then one last question. You know, it would be one thing if council were acting tonight to impose a tax on all Denver residents. But but you're simply asking me to ask you to put that question out to voters. Is there is there any fear in doing that, in just letting voters decide? I think that's absolutely correct. That's what we're doing is we're letting voters decide. And, you know, that's that is all that we can do and the rest is up to them. And so I think that they have been asking for us to ask them this question. And now here is the question there. We can put it forward to him. Thank you. Councilwoman. Can each. Thank you, Mr. President. You are in the unenviable position of chairing your first meeting as chair. You certainly chaired many meetings and Councilman Brooks's absence, but your. So I just want to be very transparent, ask you a question. So I have a question I want to ask you, but I need to lay some groundwork for it, which are clearly comments. And so I'm happy to wait and do that in the comment portion, if that's the way you prefer it, versus kind of feeling like I'm laying too much groundwork in the Q&A and we've done this before during debates where you you know, especially with bill sponsors in particular, where questions will continue. We're not in a quasi judicial role here. So I don't know that it's a big deal, but I just wanted to ask your preference on that. How about because I just noticed that we have a council person who's in the Q hasn't gone. How about I just come back to you at the end of questions and we'll use you to comment or question us transition. Okay. How about that? Thank you. All right. So, Councilwoman Ortega, so okay with you, I'm going to go to Councilman Do because he hasn't got a chance, councilman. Thank you. I just want to ask again about make sure I'm real clear about the five year plan on priorities versus the annual budget process and priorities that that Parks and Rec would have. How how do you keep those separate? And how and how is that going to be made sure that this new money's not going to supplant additional operating funds? Yeah, there are essentially and we've gone through this in in different pieces. And so I'm glad you asked that question. There are three places where we have a touch, where the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board has a touch to check in on all of this. Number one is that the Parks Department has to create and then every five years update a five year plan showing, okay, this is what passed. This is how much money we have here. The needs here are what it can be spent on and give us that vision for how they're going to achieve that with the dollars over a five year time period. We then and that will have to be presented to Proud, which is an open and public meeting and presented to council. So we have a touch there on, okay, how are you going to get there? What is that vision? Because right now we don't have this master plan for where do we need to acquire land because we've never had money to do that. We don't you know, we don't have that sitting there. So they're going to have to speak to how are they going to accomplish that? Every year they then have to report out separate from the budget process on how exactly that money was spent as opposed to this five year vision. But how were the dollars spent in this year so that we can again look at what was the intent of the ordinance and how were those dollars spent and was it in line with this five year plan? And then on top of that, the money then also goes through our budget process. So when we sit down and we have our budget hearing with the Parks Department, they'll say our budget used to be $78 million. Now it's, you know, 70 it was 45. And here's our total process. Here's our total department and here's how we're moving everything forward, including those dollars. And that's where we also get that touch on it. Or are they drifting away from preserving that general fund? Is everything else in the budget growing and it's shrinking and they're actually stealing general fund money away when the intent of the ordinance is for this to be new money. So those are all the touches that we get of those same things, go through the Parks and Rec Advisory Board and both of those public processes. So any priorities that Parks and Rec has now won't be used for this new money. Right. I think there's a lot of places where the existing priorities of our parks, they certainly want to get every playground up to date. And I think they want to acquire land where we need it. You know, I talked about the the piece of land in Golden Triangle that they tried to acquire because they knew that was established park desert and just didn't have the money to get there. So I do think that, you know, those overarching goals are always the goals. We just haven't had enough money to put those goals into that five year action plan. How are we going to get there? Where are we targeting? Where do we need a pocket park? Where do we need a regional park? How do we solve these gaps and and and that road map? So this builds a real assurance to voters that this will be new money and new additional money that we do not have now. This is written as strongly as Zach and the attorneys would let me within the confines of TABOR to that end. So without Taber could have made it maybe a little bit stronger, but it is written as strong as possible that this will be new money. Thank you. Councilwoman Ortega. Councilman, do you want to finish your line of questions? Okay. So I wanted to ask either Director Haines or Scott Gilmore if you could clarify whether or not our golf courses are included in the amount of acreage that was defined when you described how many acres of parkland we have in the city. Scott, you were the one that gave us those figures. Can you just tell us whether that included our golf courses? Yes. Yes, it does. Those are acres that are included as part of the 6000 acres of the city that does include the golf course. And then I just wanted to ask you additionally, if if you would potentially see this fund being used for any single project. So, for example, we know there's a need and you all already own the land next to Capo Simonetti Park that potentially addresses some of the flooding issue issues in Globeville. So, you know, building out that master plan or potentially using it for purchasing Park Hill golf course. So help me understand how you all envision that versus. I'm going to let happy come up. Okay, speak to that one. Versus a little bit more equitable distribution of the resources. Thank you for the question, Councilwoman. I think it addresses a number of the questions that council members have had around the equity and the priority setting. And obviously, we haven't looked at that in detail and don't have an answer tonight. But I will tell you that part of the the thinking that we use in establishing our priorities, some of it is based on the data. So we use, for example, Scott mentioned the playground master plan. We do have data around the park desert and where we do not meet the ten minute standard in the city we use . And this is captured in our game plan that will be adopted fairly soon. And it and it goes through a set of priorities which include, by the way, at the top of that list the the idea of equity. And we we use demographics in a neighborhood as well as the amount of parkland, the accessibility to parks. I mean, so these are all criteria that we use. And I would I would mention to those of you who recall the process we use during the most recent bond and when we came forward with our set of recommended projects and priorities, we shared with you a set of principles that guided that thinking, some of it based on data and others based on just principles around equity, access, condition. You know, if we have a historic property or a fountain, it's about to fall down. You know, those those kinds of emergency repairs have us have a place in our priority setting system, but we do share those. And that's something that guides us not only in the recent bond process, but also guides our thinking in terms of our budget, our city budget requests each year. So that would get set out in advance. And then you would have the opportunity as council members and the prob certainly would and do to determine how much the principles that we have recommended are reflected in the projects that we're bringing forward. So we could look at a particular project, but I think we would be applying those principles before we said this money is going to use for this project or that project and have the opportunity for others to weigh in on it. I hope that answers your question. Yes. So let me ask you additional question about comments the mayor made today about looking at race and equity in across the city. How do you see that applying differently than what you just elaborated on? I think it's right on point. The issues of equity we use, for example, health data, we use income data, we use data around the accessibility, the ten minute standard, the condition of the facilities in a particular neighborhood. So all of those, I think, are were really the heart of what the mayor was proposing. So in areas that, for example, don't have the same basic standards of infrastructure around the parks, no curb, gutter, sidewalk, is that going to be something that you see being prioritized in areas where those don't exist? So that may be a little bit different question. We're already working on the issue of sidewalks and mobility with respect to parks and working with public works. We prioritize some of ours. We use some mobility standards. So in a neighborhood, if our park is the only way to provide access, that does become a priority. But with regard to mobility issues, that would be a collaborative process. Okay. Let me say I think I have one additional question. And this is for you, Councilman Clark. You and I had a brief conversation today, and I brought this up when. When we met. Initially when you were proposing this talking about. A separate process for how we would then prioritize. So. And I just want to ask how much thought you've given to maybe having a separate ordinance that maybe more clearly defines the process in which we would then prioritize? So if this passes tonight and this would not be a companion that would go to the ballot, but it would be something that we would do. And it's not unusual for this body. So, for example, in the past, when we would adopt, you know, a. When we would move a bond list to the to the ballot, we would prioritize that in a separate ordinance. And just wanted to ask your thoughts about. About that. So that I think that would give a lot more voter confidence to ensuring that there's going to be more robust public input into how we prioritize the list of the projects that would potentially be funded, because essentially this becomes a windfall of new money to the Parks Department. And yes, we know that we've gone through the bond process. We know we've gone through the game plan process. But, you know, this this whole process was done kind of in isolation of looking at other big picture priorities for the city. And, you know, it kind of leapfrogged in front of everything else. And so, you know, some of the comments you've heard from some of my colleagues around, ensuring that we're going to be able to address some of those other needs into the future. And for me, part of that is, you know, can we be can we realistically fund those if we reach our bond indebtedness, you know, which is a whole separate thing that I think we need to get some some clarity on. But can you just speak to that? Yeah. I mean, I'll start by saying I talk about parks all day long. How long you got? We can stay here all night if you want. And so I'm. Talking to hopefully for setting the priorities. I know. So I am totally open to any any discussion about that process. You know, you and I talked just a couple hours before council, and so I don't know what that process looks like. And we certainly need to loop in our Parks Department to make sure that that process works. I think we also need to take a good look at our awesome probe, which, you know, I pointed out is one of the only oversight board that we have where we get to a point directly, people to it and that is protected and charter and look at where those pieces are. I'm certainly open to having those conversations and what you know, this bill is limited by what can be in it, Per TABOR. And I'm completely open to having discussions about how we tackle more of these issues and specifically how we look at, you know, planning for this money moving forward. Okay. Let me just say that I think our prep board does, in fact, bring some expertize. And I'm not suggesting they not be included. I'm suggesting we have something broader than that that ensures that we've got more robust community input into defining some of the key criteria in which we then set those priorities, very similar to what we did with our housing fund that created, you know, the House, the adoption of a housing plan. And the other thing that I'll just point out is we've just gone through a 18 month process in looking at game plan. And I don't know if everyone has seen that framework, but this is a great time to be coming forward and looking at the framework that the community and all of our stakeholders have worked really hard at providing that framework for some of those and using that to launch with the new lens of We have new money. Should the book, should this council choose to refer and should voters choose to pass? That's the end of my question. Councilman Flynn, did you have a quick one before I get back to Councilwoman Cannick? Yeah. Yes, I. Did. And it came up during Councilwoman Ortega's questioning with Happy Hour Haines, our executive director. So I don't know if you can answer this right now or not happy, but in looking at our under parked areas, our underserved areas, I think Councilman Lopez and I represent what may be the most severely under part in terms of acres per capita other than Councilman News Central City, which is a function of density. Where is the opportunity, however, to add park land in areas that are almost fully developed? Are we looking at possibly using eminent domain to acquire properties? The only open space in my district that I can think of that park right now and it's urgent, is the Loreto Heights College campus that's being sold in the process of being sold and working with the developer to maximize, to the extent possible, new open space there. But elsewhere the largest what swaths of open space in my district would be maybe Fort Logan National Cemetery. So where do you see the opportunity to add parks, for instance, in council districts three, four and three and two? And thank you, Councilman. Great question. And I don't have a complete answer to that, certainly. Um, uh, and say in areas that are, um, fully developed, it takes a great deal of, of creativity to figure out how you can, um, identify the right places and the opportunities for acquisition. So it may boil down to acquisition of private land. And I, and I will just say this we've been engaged in that in any event over the years. Where we where we recognize a parcel or we work, for example, in partnership with an organization like Excel that is has a surplus property or is is looking to get rid of property. We have partnered over the years with our friends at the Trust for Public Land who are diligent about looking for those opportunities for acquisition around the city in in a fully developed city like ours, it takes a great deal of creativity and, you know, we won't have many more opportunities like Stapleton in Green Valley Ranch in the Central Valley, where it was all part of the development plan. We've got to be very, very strategic and and creative on how to get that job done. But I'll point out, one in the southwest area that was once a trailer park, nobody ever thought that. I thought about that as a park. And yet, you know, today it is a it is a reality. So those are the kinds of efforts that we would be undertaking and we would be looking very much at those under parked areas of the city. Thank you. Thank you very much. I would look forward anxiously should the voters approve this to the first five year plan. And I'd ask you to focus particularly on South Harvie Park South, where there are no parks, and Brentwood where there are no parks. Thank you. Think pass first, Councilman. Thank you. All right, Councilwoman. And thanks for your patience. Lay the groundwork. Ask your questions. Thank you so much. Mr. President. So I was thinking about, you know, how a sales tax measures that go to the voters are often approached. And I've I've seen kind of two different categories. I've seen those that have the guaranteed outcomes, which is like our bond project, right? You're going to get this project, you're going to get this many lanes paved. You're going to get this many acres of, you know, parkland, you know, and then and then there's some that are a little more open ended. And I think that's where you get into more of the process. Right. And so our housing fund did not go to the voters, but we did our best to approach it as if, you know, we were doing that kind of thing. And and it was the guaranteed process approach which didn't say whether or how much was going to be for sale or how much was going to be rental or how much was going to be deeply low income. And so and I was looking back at some of the language, but, you know, so the process that we went to had a whole bunch of details that, you know, as Councilwoman Ortega mentioned, are a little bit absent from this one. And I want to just share some of the lessons that we learned in this process that I think this department's going to experience. So the first thing you're going to learn is the money will arrive on day one. And in fact, the plan will not arrive until about when the budget is being adopted for year two, it'll be too late. You'll have already had to start the budget process five months, six months before the plan is ready. So you in theory, will actually have to have two years of spending before you have a plan. So that's something we didn't anticipate and there is a whole bunch. So and when I talk about the groundwork I'm laying, there are things that have to be done within the ordinance and then there's things that maybe need to be done in parallel, even if they're not done. And this is one of them that I think we underestimated the level of distrust, the level of confusion that can occur when you have to spend two years worth of revenue before your plan is inked. So I want to flag that as an example. The second thing, we have a game plan and it's great. I think none of us can imagine the kind of metrics you're going to get asked for. So for every dollar we spend in construction, how much is generated in maintenance needs each year and then in operational use each year? What is the metric by which? Because when people are faced with choices, don't just say, Well, should we build more or should we maintain more? What you're going to want to know from your department is stuff that I promise you they don't know yet. You're going to ask them things like, if we put 20% of this money into maintenance, what standard would we bring the entire system up? Would we bring it up 1%? When we bring it up 3%, would we bring it up 4%? And so there are going to be brand new metrics that will blow your brains that we're going to need to make good decisions and we won't make perfect decisions and some of the metrics won't be available. You're going to need consultants. This is the short story. There's just no way I think you're going to be able to kind of do this. So, you know, is there and this is one of those things that's a little different because this is kind of coming a little bit more from the council community advocacy than a partnership. And that's okay. I don't I hear very open minded partners who say that we respect the. Charter. And if this happens, we're going to be your partners. But for example, to get some commitments about what does good help look like and what might we need to think about in a first year budget to make sure that we're preparing ourselves for success? Another thing. I didn't get a chance. I was trying to pull up the crab ordinance. I think you made a really smart decision, which is to use a little of the infrastructure you've got. But what's interesting about crab is it's appointed based on representation of districts. It means it doesn't have, for example, things the Housing Advisory Committee had, which is finance expertize. You know, since it's not centrally appointed, you can't assure racial diversity because if every council member appoints their own person, there's no way to control for. Right. What the racial diversity might be or what the economic diversity is. The mayor has a few more seats. He can appoint a little bit to account for that. But you've got. And then the question of time and what you know, you know what ability that body has to dedicate. I know they do hold some public hearings now, but I think these are all things that to get to. Councilwoman Ortega's point are things that we learned we didn't know and that, you know, in this context, we as a city would learn. And I think that when you add then this question of the equity layer, I think that what I believe is that this isn't just a value and it isn't just hard data. There is actually a practice here. And it's you know, I think, you know, we just several of us were just in Minneapolis with local progress, hearing about some of their work. And, you know, Seattle is model this. So I think that, you know, one of the things that it might be worth it to do is to think about, so what are the practices and even just language in the ordinance or or whether it's inside the ordinance or outside that we want to be prepared to say, for example, that needs to be that it needs to be considered. And I think that. We are not in such a hurry that it might not be that we can't take a minute to have two conversations. And the two conversations that for me are emerging from this hearing are one. Let's just take a a week, two weeks and look at what the best practices are on equity in parks planning and parks stuff . And we may have a lot of them in our game plan, but let's just peak at what the literature tells us. And let's hear from some of the communities asking this question about whether there is a need to have a reference in the ordinance or whether there's a need to have something we can commit to outside the four squares of the ordinance. That would help put us on the same page, because the communities that have traditionally been excluded from parks conversations are the ones that have not been at the table for the ten years. Right. And so to me, one of the purposes of these hearings is to tell us if we're going in the right direction or the wrong direction or if we have everybody at the table. And I fear that there are some folks we haven't had at the table and they need a minute to catch up. I didn't hear a no, we can't. But and then secondly, to have a pretty serious conversation with, you know, the administration and your community leaders to say. We need a little something to think about what's charting us in year one or two, because I think to say to the voters, like, we'll figure it out in a five year plan that'll be ready for year three. And we don't have any sense of what are the two most impactful things we might be able to do in year one. I think is missing the boat and I frankly think it'll be make it hard to pass. So if if you're here tonight and you're like, I'm gung ho and I want to pass this thing. I think the second piece is really going to be able to kind of give you something to talk to the voters about that's legit rather than just saying, hey, the department will figure it out because it's a lot to put. I mean, I think that that's my experience. It's a lot to put in a department that's running all of the other things. It's running with no preparation. And I think that, you know, so and I think that to Councilman Ortega's point, it may include a few tweaks to the process. And I know there was a quick mention that some of this can't be put in the in the in a TABOR ordinance. And so I don't I don't I don't know if that's a factual, truthful thing that that we couldn't, for example, say that one of the things that needs to occur is there needs to be two public hearings prior to the finalization of the plan. Right. May be one in the beginning. I mean, we put things like, you know, the the you know, the the fact that in the housing ordinance, for example, we put that, you know, there would be, you know, data use a database approach or we put in that there would be a public hearing. And so I wonder if if that kind of language couldn't be bolstered slightly. So so it's I just may throw the Tabor question out real quick and then you can hear where I'd come in for your questions. But. Um, so. Kirsten Crawford Legislative. Council the one thing I would say to this whole conversation is that to the extent you're going to start prioritizing how the money is spent, if it's if it's done in here, I think that's okay. But if you're trying to do it separately as an ordinance, I think you would run into a problem with the charter, quite possibly because they're the charter of the Department of Parks with almost total discretion as to how that money is spent. So I think if you do want to make those priorities, it would need to be in something that is. Referred to the voters. So let me just follow up with that. So would it, for. Example, would it be out of the purview for, for example, for Councilman Clark to be in negotiations or discussion with the department and to say, like, it's going to take us a year to do a plan? Our view is that the primary goal of year one is to set aside a small portion to purchase parks opportunistically should it come, and then to use the remainder for park, you know, for projects, for example, that are already on the list just for year one, and to make that a verbal discussion about intent rather than a legally binding commitment. Again, I think there is things that live outside the language here that that might be helpful for the community conversation. Yeah, I mean, I think that I would always promote from a legal position that you work closely with the administration, and I think that you could do it that way as well. Yeah. And so so I'm just throwing out some pathways. So I think there's some homework. I think it's really important for Prep to have a conversation about how prepared it is for this role. And and this role says it's a receiving role. It's not an advising role. It says Prabhas shall receive the budget shall receive the the proposal. And so the question for Parab is, you know, is there anything you need that would be different to be successful and or is that the right process? Is there you know, are you the should you be holding a hearing? Should we be asking you to hold a hearing to make sure that occurs? And how about expertize parab? How is it that you're going to get the expertize you need? Is that just staff or do you think that you need access to some some expertize and some consulting or something in terms of some of the other folks who've spoken today who are might be very talented but aren't necessarily members of Prep. So I think there's homework for Parab and you know, they can't speak. But you know, I'd be curious if they'd be open to taking a week or two to do that. I think the question for you is, would you be willing to take a little time to have a discussion with the equity community about what the homework is? It might be there's language and it might not be. It might be to say, here are the three things we need to do between now and November so that we can talk about this and have some shared language. And then maybe if it passes, then there's other homework. So it doesn't I mean, I'm not saying talk about amendments, but you might want to be open to that. And then the third thing is, would you have a conversation with the administration? I think about a little more meat on the bones in terms of this process. And it sounds like we do have a charter limitation we're running against. But but just to get some clarity that this is not just I just don't know that you're going to the voters with a blank check will be as successful as a little more and it might mean some tweak to the process in the ordinance. Yeah. So three, three, three homeworks maybe. So I completely appreciate that. And I think that the, you know, especially having gone through that and having that expertize for me, you know, a couple of things that I'll say is I think that one, because this was originally driven by the community and they need time to get signatures and we're committed to getting this on the ballot. They took a chance with us as well. And part of that was a commitment to for us to either do this or leave them time that they can do this. And so. Well, we may have one deadline for actually getting on the ballot. We have another one for living up to the commitment that I made to the community that we would take this on, because they said, even if you're if you're not going to do it, if there isn't the will on this council to refer than we are. And so I do worry about handicapping the promise that and maybe that doesn't affect anyone else because I'm the one who made that commitment. But that's important to me. I also think that it is it is difficult to work with the administration. They're awesome in general, but and especially with our awesome parks staff and appointees, when it's something that the administration hasn't decided, whether they're supportive or not. So it puts it in a place where are they working to pass it? Are they working to kill it and can that be accomplished once it's on the ballot line? So we refer it. Then I think that pulls the lever, that opens the door to those conversations about what do we do in year one? And because now it's real. And so, you know, for me, I think and I'm absolutely open to sitting down with all in and with any other group that wants to talk about how this can. I am very open to continuing the conversation about what else can we do through code or through verbal commitments or through a press release that now that this is going to be on the ballot, the department and the administration can make commitments to what they would do that they might not when they haven't decided where they are on something. So I'm very open to having those conversations. But I do think that at this point, bringing it to a final reading, I would like us to vote on it tonight. And if it is not the will of this council to refer at this point, then I have a different set of homework. But even if it is. The will of this council to refer. I still have a lot of homework and I'm very committed to doing that. So if I may, Mr. President. So I guess this I just would like to then throw the question, I guess, a little bit, too, to my colleagues to say I think I think the point is persuasive about about the departments in an awkward position. So maybe that's too much to ask. But I think that it's quite possible that this language could be tweaked, for example, to include a reference that equity shall be a consideration in the expenditure of the funds and that there shall be a public hearing held, you know, no less than 90 days prior to the adoption of the plan to ensure that there is some public input sooner. I mean, it seems to me and I, you know, I don't necessarily want to write an amendment on the floor. So I think that a week to. And I'm sorry, was that because I'm guessing you're not going to pose that question to each individual. So can we close the public hearing and then you can get into that and. Come and I guess I'll pose it to you, which is to say, you know, we can I can try to draft an amendment to try to add a little bit of what I heard from the community to the bill tonight. Or we could think about a one week delay. And I think folks could probably speak to whether or not they're headed for support and this helps versus whether or not we might tank this thing next week. I don't intend to tank this thing. I'm a co-sponsor because I believe we can't grow without it. But I think that it can be stronger if we take the input and we do a week's worth of work to to add some language. So. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you. All right. Councilman Ortega, you back with a question, not a comment. I'll wait and sorry for comments. Okay. Councilman Espinosa, your questions or comments? What's that? Comments. Comments. Okay. So no other questions. Council. The public hearing for Constable 641 is closed. Comments by members of Council. Councilwoman Ortega. Thank you, Mr. President. I appreciate all of your efforts in bringing this forward and. You know, trying to address what what I think is a great need in our community. I hope that. We can look at a one week delay that gives us the opportunity to identify some of these key priorities that should be in a process that ensures voter confidence that it is not just a blank check to the Parks and Rec Department, and given the authority that's been given by the charter to the manager of Parks and Rec. They could choose to put the money into one project or, you know, create it however they want to apply it. And I think by having some criteria that. Really kind of defines how we prioritize these moneys is is really critical to people having that confidence that there's, you know, some of these key issues are going to be addressed, equity being one, geographic disbursement being another, taking care of parks that, you know, have have had such a state of disrepair across the city is is another key priority. I mean, looking at some of our medians in the city where, you know, depending on where you're at, some are maintained very well and others are not maintained at all. And so it's that equitable distribution of the resources. This is new money. It's a new day. It's different than what exists today. And so we could create it however we want to. And it gives us an opportunity to be a little bit more thoughtful. So my recommendation is that we do a one week postponement and allow for the opportunity to just have that check in with some additional folks to identify some of those process issues and be able to, you know, I want to get there to be able to support this. But without that, I'm I'm real concerned. I feel really disconnected from from that process in terms of ensuring that the public really gets to weigh in. And, you know, that's regardless of whatever input that we've already had into blueprint in game plan, I mean, game plan is a long term look at the needs of the city. It was not intended for us to find a check and just immediately try to knock out every one of those projects. It was to to look at the long term need of the city. And, you know, if we had this conversation with every other city agency, they would all have a list of priorities that they would want to see funded. And so, you know, the fact that this was kind of in isolation of this body really being able to weigh in on policy priorities for the city independent of the budget process that we normally go through. I guess I just. I'm debating whether to just move a motion that we delay for a week, but I want to. Let everybody have a carbon. First. Comments from from other folks. But, you know, I feel that strongly about the process. Of having public input, that we really do need to delay this to weigh in on what some of those key criteria are that, you know, even if per the the comments made by the city attorney, if we adopted a separate ordinance that defined a process, we don't really have the authority to dictate that because that authority's already given to the manager of the Parks and Rec Department. And so how do we get there independent of of being able to fold it in to this process here tonight and have some some serious commitments to getting that done? So anyway, that's where I'm at right now. Thank you, Councilman or Councilman Espinosa? Well, I applaud the efforts to sort of. I don't know. Conflicted. Conflicted or I don't know what the right word is right now. It escapes me to confuse what is a simple ask of the voters into something far, far more complex. Yes, I understand that this would be a tax burden that would then subsequently, in the future years or with all the ballot measures coming forward, that this would increase tax burden to a point where we might hit a breaking point sooner. The fact that we have education, transportation, mental health and parks on this ballot, if this goes through, speak to the need that these things weren't addressed in $5 billion worth of other expenditures by the city. And the fact that we don't have a housing, we didn't have a housing component in the Gabon and we don't have a housing component. I mean, housing bond is because we worked with this administration or others worked with this administration. And to Councilman Clark's point, the administration isn't. The most flexible are amenable to these sorts of things. So sometimes people have to act. And I'm glad to hear that. Brandon People are prepared to act because I know my constituents wildly supported the Green Roofs Initiative and they would wildly support this as well. So. The my frustration is, is that we have, you know, this talk towards the end about equity is important. But demographic, demographic shift. And we can't do a plan based on who is there. The park is permanent. It gets built and it stays there regardless of who lives around it. Who makes up that community? Otherwise, my park at 38th and Navajo Osage or Osage Park before it was Columbus Park, too. And, you know, and cater to the Italian community there or the Scottish community that was before that, or the Latino community that put in the kiosk or who's there now, which is neither of the above but some of the above. So we can't you know, parks are one of those things that is more about mean jump, not demographics, but geographic and access and amenities. You know, these are physical things that that these dollars are intended to address. And we have plenty of public input. There are council representation for every one of these parks except for the mountain parks. But it's all of us. There's there's there's two at large. As that will also represent each one of those council members has a proud member. And there's an essential component of this to go to prep you know in so yeah it's not perfect but guess what. Six months after the vote we can tweak it still so and then if it's onerous and it kills you know the city because there's too much taxes in the future council can 86 it completely go to zero we can't up it but we can lower it and that was made very clear so. You know. It's just it is it is just a matter of getting it on the ballot and it is not as bad as it could be. Sorry, Brandon. You know, we know what that looks like. This is not that. It is. It is. It is. It is been thought about. It is considered. It has the mechanisms and it is not going to be onerous to have it. We have enough need, enough enough demand that we could figure out how to to navigate a struggle. If we're not, we should have the we should have the foresight. I mean, if this gets a voted in November, we can we may we. When I got on the council in July, we made tweaks to our budget before the end of the year. We can make tweaks to our budget to start to capture this, even if it's sort of premature and still get it to private and still get community input. That is not a slow process when there is this much need. So that was my deviation is a frustrated because I just get that way but. Um. You know this. We already talked about that. So our standard operating procedure right now is, you know, I mean, this idea of development impact fee, I'm all for it. Sorry, developers, I think you have an impact and we should be addressing that and have proud to support anybody's efforts towards that end. But when you do a developer impact fee, there's still going to be pressure to locate it, co-locate it relative to those developments. I mean, that they both Stapleton didn't put their parks outside of Stapleton. You know, they put them in their development. That's that's smart. That's logical. Our standard operating procedure to let developers pay for a new park construction is part of their metro district, you know, and then turns over to the city after the fact. That, too, is specific to that community. Those things are not happening with this proposal. This is equitable by its very nature. If we put pressure on the administration to address those needs, and that's our responsibility as as legislators and as taxpayers and as as the electorate in this city. When we did the Metropolitan Football City District, that will be a hearing we have in the end of this month. We did a tax just like this for a football stadium, just one, not a 301 football stadium. And so for a couple of dozen men, men only to play on and half of them are from out of town. You know. And the field can only be used for a fee. It is not a free field. And your tax dollars went to that. So for a little more than double that amount you can tax, we can support to expand and improve a network of over 300 parks and 20,000 acres that are available to everyone. And that in that's art I mean and that and the fact that our lands are not exclusive and there is no goal and there is a goal to make parks proximate and apart. Part of this is a goal to make parks proximate to every resident addresses by very normal reservations about the use of sales tax, because this is a far more egalitarian use than a stadium or a stock show or a convention center or any of the other things we use tax dollars for. So I won't continue to go on my tirade. It's just that this is this is a fair thing to put before the voters. And, yeah, it'll be a lot of asks and people will really have to dig deep in my own personal preferences. We put it on mental health and we put it on parks. I believe in mobility, but this is tied too much with roadway. I would put that down and then come back, but we make it very clear. So that's me rambling on a whole bunch of ballot measures. This one is one that I wholeheartedly support just getting to the voters because the community, just like other needs, have asked. And I'm happy to help with a housing portion as well. But that's my $0.02. Thanks. Thank you. Councilman, it's a weird night to be in this chair. As Councilman can already pointed out, generally as the bill's sponsor, I would have gone first in my comments. I was going to defer to go last, but I'm now going to jump in just to say a few things. I appreciate the conversation, just to speak specifically to the conversation about the delay. I appreciate that conversation. And it's hard because every time we talk about something that isn't easy, which is pretty much everything we talk about, there's always an argument and to delay and it's hard to tell what what is behind that. Some people who are going to vote no ask for a delay because that gives more time to convince other people to vote no. And sometimes there are real and legitimate reasons to delay. For me, the person who I am. Everything that has gone into my life to define me is about equity in parks. I took literally thousands and thousands of kids on field trips to the South Platte River. I was on top of Ruby Hill when there were bullet holes in the playground and the trees had been tagged. And when a car pulled up at 10:00 in the morning and started doing donuts and I had to run for shelter with 60 kids trying to add positive engagement and introduce kids and create a space in our third largest park, right behind Wash Park, where there was not equity, there was not the investment that we were making . We were able to make that investment and we started to write some of those wrongs. I, I took a group of teenagers who had been expelled from the Denver public schools, and half of them had ankle bracelets on, and they showed up to do the field trip that I usually did with fourth graders, where we were going to go and paint for gold and look for crawdads. And they were all swearing left and right and mad about this, except for as soon as we started turning over rocks and they found their first crawdads and we found a praying mantis climbing on a tree, and they were then posing for pictures, doing, you know, like gangster photos with a praying mantis on their shoulder. Everything changed because for the first time, they had access. I for me and who I am and the commitments that I made to the community that was looking at running this and to the community that has spent their lives waiting for this moment, waiting for a council that had the courage to at least take this on and refer it to the voters. I can't get here and then delay, because if it's not enough who I am and the fiber of me to believe that I will work I will work with our equity partners. I will work with everyone between now and hopefully when the voters pass us to address these. I don't think these are things that need to be solved in the ordinance. And for people who have waited decades of their lives to get to this moment. We need to have a vote. And if it is the will of this council to vote this down, then I can go back and I can talk to the community and I can say I delivered on my promise to get it as far as I could and we can sit and decide whether they want to take this directly to the ballot or take a second shot and refile it and take a couple extra weeks. So as the sponsor of the bill, I am 100% committed to solving the things that have been brought up. I don't think that they need to be solved here. I think that we need to give this community the answer about whether we are ready to do this or not and then give them the time to work on this for November if we are. So that was my comment. Just because I want us to go too far down the path of delay or not delay without people knowing where I am on that issue. Councilman Cashman. Thank you, Mr. President. If if this is an either or vote about housing our people or expanding dollars invested in our parks. I'm voting no on this. But it's not that. And I think the Denver electorate should be under no illusions that whether it's sales tax or bonds or impact fees or tourism fees, we need more money for housing. We need more money for transportation. And so I think this does need to go to the voters, but the voters need to be aware that there are are choices that they're going to have to make depending on how they feel they can spend. This is on $10. If you're making a $10 purchase, it's going to be $10.03. If you're making $100 purchase, it's it's going to be $100.25 and $1,000. It's $1,002.50. Different people in this room tonight and certainly watching this on TV and among the electorate are going to have differing opinions on how that impacts them. I'm willing to commit to spending this extra amount of money and also willing to consider some additional requests on other needs that our city has right now in my district. We're looking at developments that will come, one particular development that will come before council, one that didn't need to come before council on a total of about 2425 acres of former sea dog property that. The city was unable to buy. Because we don't have any money to make those level of purchases. Now, I don't know that I would have recommended that we buy 25 acres and make it all parkland. There's other needs. I would definitely want part of that parcel which is projected to have for affordable housing. But it would have been nice if we at least had the option to say, you know what? Why don't we take five acres? And by that. For Parkland. And then look at developing housing and retail and commercial on the rest. Today, we don't have that option. This is not a case of taking a park system that is a one primo shape and really pushing it to the next level. We've got enormous deferred maintenance on our park system right now. We as has been stated in a number of ways, we need to add additional acreage. This is extremely important. I mean, we're looking at Parks Department right now is considering a major change to our alcohol policy in the parks. Where once it was 3.2 beer and now we're looking at possibly allowing full strength beer and wine. In all our parks, we're looking at adding the ability to permit hard liquor and the sale of hard liquor and beer and wine in 180 additional parks. Right now, we have permitting of that sort in about 20 of our parks. We have. We don't have the Rangers to begin to enforce the existing laws in our parks. We need additional humans. We need additional land. We need additional policies. I. Councilman Clark, I think you're right on the money in the need for this. And as far as equity goes, if previous generations had not thought to give us Paco Sanchez Park, we wouldn't be prepared to do the improvements that are being done in that part of town. That being said, I would support a week. I this is my view. I would because I hear the questions that have been raised tonight and. You know, I really think for the at least the vast bulk of us on council, I have a hunch that we're preaching to the choir on the need to to expand our parkland . If we take a week. I would be stunned. If we didn't end up with a stronger bill that passed with a greater majority. That's that's just the way I assess where council is on this right now. Yeah. You know, we're not going to improve equity unless we come up with extra dollars, that's for sure. But I do think we could strengthen this bill so the voters outside this room that may have more questions would be more likely to vote for it. So thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilwoman Black. Thank you, Mr. President. I will be supporting this tonight. I. Support everything you just said in your comments. Councilman Flynn, I just want to bring up the Trust for Public Lands Parks Index, and it may surprise you to know that my district is actually the worse off for parks. Councilwoman Sussman is second and yours is third. So I. I encourage everyone to be acquainted with some facts. I do have two golf courses in my district, but they are not open to the public, so they don't count. So I don't have a lot of parks in my district. My own neighborhood doesn't have a park. And 20 years ago I personally raised the money and I worked with Denver Public Schools to landscape a place or a school play field. And it was a big battle with DPS because they don't always play nice for that sort of thing. No offense happy, but you know what I'm talking about. And today it serves as our community park. And without that we no one had a ten or 15 or 20 minute walk to a park. I have another neighborhood that is under growing great, great density near the between the Yale and the Colorado light rail stations. Hundreds of new units are going in. And I've met when I first was elected, I met with Trust for Public Lands. We talked about it. They said absolutely there is a need. And since then we've had hundreds of new units built in that neighborhood. I've had happy hands out Scott Gilmore, the mayor. That neighborhood needs a park. And as far as the priorities of this council, at our retreat we had last winter, I suggested that all of the priorities for the city are all related to growth. And I very much supported that day that parks should be a priority. And I think Councilman Clark and I might have been the only ones who voted for it. Maybe Councilwoman Gilmore, too. It didn't make the cut, but. Green space is a huge need for a city that is getting more and more dense. And so I don't I don't think it's accurate to say it wasn't one of our priorities, but because it was for for some of us. I also have read the draft game plan, which has been alluded to a lot tonight, and it does indeed talk about a lot of these values that all the speakers are talking about and also more parks. I've met with people a number of times and I'm very familiar with all of their studies. And there they have a park score for the 100 largest cities in the United States. Councilman Clark referred to this earlier. Denver spot on that list has fallen to 26. Aurora, Colorado, is 20th. Of the top cities. They spend some of them more than twice as much per resident on their parks than we do in Denver, Colorado . And that's not a coincidence that they would be tough when we're spending half or less than half that their park score would be so much higher than ours. Most of them have a dedicated funding source, and almost all of them have a parks foundation, which is something I'm also working on. Hello, all of you right here, which serves a complementary purpose and is also recommended by game plan. So just want to say thank you for having the courage to do this when a lot of people told you not to. But I am happy to support it and I know that you will work hard to address some of the issues that people have right now. Thank you, Councilwoman Black, Councilwoman Gilmore. Thank you, President Clark. I have spent like Councilman Clark. My almost entire adult life educating. Children and communities about nature and the environment. And I did that for almost 20 years. And I share with you. A short little story, because. We had a parcel of land in the Montebello community, which is in Councilman Herndon's. District. That was five and a half acres of land. It was zoned for up to an eight story high density apartment building. The catch. Was that it was directly across the street. From another very high density. Apartment building that had a very high crime rate and lots of different issues. And there was no money to buy this five and a half acres. So my small nonprofit started talking to Great Outdoors Colorado, The Trust for Public Lands, anybody and everybody that we could talk to. We started talking with them, but it was still. A very, very heavy. Lift for a small community based organization to try to cobble together $1.6 million to buy this five and a half acres of land. And the reason that we wanted to. Buy this five and a half acres of land. Was not to. Benefit the nonprofit. It was to benefit the youth and the families that we serve. Because every single time we would take a group of students. From Montebello. Commerce City or Aurora, we'd take them up to the mountains. We take them to some place to recreate. Every time that we were driving out of our own neighborhood, they were looking around saying, Why don't we. Have the beautiful parks, the beautiful trails? Why don't we have this in our neighborhood? Why do we have to get into 15 passenger vans and leave our home to go see nature and to see beauty and to reap the benefits of being outdoors? We shouldn't have to. And at the end of the day, nature doesn't discriminate. Nature doesn't discriminate. So if we don't invest in future generations, in our generation by buying parkland now, we're not going to have it and we're not going to get it back. And we can't have asphalt parking lots that we're trying to reclaim and create. Great wildlife habitat or parks. It just you're talking about exponential costs instead of doing this the right way first. And so with that short story, in my entire career as an outdoor educator before I was on city council, this is an investment in youth, families, seniors. It's an investment in our neighborhoods in having beautiful green spaces. It's an investment in health, our mental health, our physical health, our spirit, spiritual health and opportunity in our fast paced lives to disconnect and just be outdoors. And to recharge. It's an investment in communities of color. This is an investment in equity because we don't have certain amenities that other parts of the city have for a multitude of different reasons. And we could debate that for days on end why that has occurred. Or we can do something right now and refer this to the ballot for the voters to actually decide. This is an investment in the environment. We're going to have more trees for air quality. We're going to be able to mitigate the heat island effect. We're going to have better water quality. And we haven't even started talking about the community gathering spaces that our parks create. Talk about equity in communities of color. Community gathering spaces are basically nonexistent. Our parks become a great community gathering place with a beautiful shelter, with grills, to to have a cookout, to have a barbeque, culture, art , mobility, greenways, trails. And we have, you know, around food sustainability. I don't believe as a city, we have fully been able to explore. How parks could help. Us with food sustainability and access, because we don't have enough we don't want to take an entire beautiful field and try to grow food when kids are trying to play soccer. So the dueling needs are too much. But if we had. More resources to buy more. Parkland, we could maybe really think out of the box. And if there is affordable housing. Projects, how do we partner with those projects. And make sure that their green space is act is adequate, that there's trail connections so that folks that are living in a high density unit can actually get out of their unit safely and go walk or bike or ride and have a park very close to them. And so that's all of these reasons beyond, you know, wanting to have a little bit more say every year, each council office creates a VIP list. We utilize what lists we get from parks, but then we add to it. We constantly are adding to it because our constituents are sending us concerns, ideas that we add to that CIP list. And so I feel like there's plenty of different touch. Points for us to. Ensure that the voters will know that this money is used in a responsible way going forward. And so I will be supporting this tonight. Thank you, President Clark. For your tireless work and persistence. In making sure that this goes forward. But I feel comfortable. Making sure that the voters have a. Chance to really look at this and weigh in on it. Thank you, President Clark. And thank you, Councilwoman Gilmore, Councilman Lopez. Thank you, Mr. President, I. I've been waiting to see something like this happen. Especially with our parks. You know, a of all the uses and functions of local government and. This. Parks is essential. Parks is essential. We have to maintain it. And we can't rely on bake sales for the things that make us that make us healthy and that are important to us. That was the case with butter. Relentless. But it didn't come automatically. I don't want some I don't want folks in this chamber to think that in the narrative that is Quatro Windows. And how were you able to get through Windows Park? Was it some automatic or it was born out of a recession. And those of us that were around in these chambers during the recession know that there was not a dime to be spent anywhere. And when I went through the council process, there was a. When I said, look, we need to pave alleys and we need to take care of our parks and we need to maintain our infrastructure. So it was met with the reply that we don't have diamonds in our pockets. And my reply was, Well, what we're asking for is a little bit of fertilizer and some asphalt. We've had to struggle to get these parks. As a matter of fact, it wasn't park money that first paid in, fund it for the bill for quarter. We had those. It was a different administration. It was a process over three mayors. I don't know how many different councils or iterations of the council. And we had a because the oh eight bond is 0708 Bond was not kind of council district three or the West Side at all. We didn't have a representative sitting on council at the time, and I guess it was just easy to pull a fast one on us. And the West Side, we made it a point not. To take $400,000 that we moved from the bond. With another some other money from already. To make it happen with the trust of public land. We shouldn't have to rely on outside third parties to fund our public. Parks. We shouldn't have to rely on our fees. To pay for something that's absolutely should be free to anybody. To enjoy. We are still very lopsided in this city. Golf courses don't count as parkland. They don't. I'm sorry. I can't go throw the ball around. I get kicked out of a golf course. We've tried it once. You can. We have to be equitable around the city to do it. And the only, the beginning phases are to make sure that we have the resources to get it done. And it's also because we also have to make sure we have the landscape architects, I tell you. So many the part of the park acreage that we have in Council District three. So much of it can be redesigned and so much of it is on is in the queue years and years away from just getting designs done because we just don't have the the resources to actually fund the personnel to do it. Right. So if we are serious about our parks, we love quoting Robert Spear and and demonstrating how much we we we are in love with our park system and let's pay for it. Right. And so this is a good way to do it. However, we are now in a we are not in a post race conscious society. We are constantly trying to talk about equity in this city in every sense of the way, whether it be economically speaking, whether it be, you know, racially, whether it be gender. And we still have a lot of work to do. Right. And yes, these neighborhoods will change in the makeup of these neighborhoods, but they change in Denver. But at least the one constant thing is, are our public infrastructure that which we can do together, that we will not be able to do individually, and that is local government . And it is our duty to make sure that it's equitable. So. You know. Do I support this? Yes. Do I support it moving forward? Absolutely. Do I support extending it a week so we can have a process, so we can make sure that we're we're working all the things out of it to make sure there's an equitable component. If there is language that we can use that's nuanced language is a language that reflects modern day governance. Absolutely. But remember at the end of the day. I could I could say this. That this this and this Parks Administration were very good to the district, have been very responsive for the last, you know, five years, six years. I sense certain since we all had come into the mayorship, they listened to our district just tell us what to do. Right. So we have the gains that we've had in our parks. But at the end of the day, our policies should survive. Whatever administration, whatever employees are in the city is should they should live to make sure that there's equity. We may have equity now, but we may not have equity later. That's why the policy is important. That's why the discussion has to be much more than just something spiritual and in the chambers. So I definitely get it. So if there is a friendly moment in the coming weeks, I'm down for it. If there is a small delay, hopefully a short delay. And I say, Sure, sure, sure. But let's get this thing moving forward. All right, let's let's let's this one to our park system. The one thing I will say is. It survives every mayor and survives every council. It will survive. Every administration. But the one thing that is constant is good old fashioned organizing. And that's what we all go to. That's what we all Paco Sanchez to. That's what we owe the rec center to. It doesn't just happen because some council person or some, you know, somebody, it touched their heart in a decision making position. It happened because of good old fashioned organizing. So if you don't have parks in your district, organize that district. You will soon as those votes start, as soon as those voters start coming into these chambers, reminding you and your colleagues and the administration that they're serious with their votes. So thank you. I supported move forward. I'm supportive of of a whatever as long as it gets approved. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman. Councilman Flynn. Thank you, Mr. President. I don't mean to get into a race to the bottom of the misery index with Councilwoman Black, who always. Well. Who always talks about the closed Kmart in her district. And I always point out that at least I have a close target in my district. But with all due respect to the Trust for Public Lands, our own City Parks Department gave me the following figures. As far as in equity and Council, District two has six developed Park Acres per thousand. Council District three Councilman Lopez, District five develop Park Acres per thousand. Residents Council District four has nine developed Park Acres, not counting golf courses per district and only councilman news central Denver district has lower and that was four acres per thousand probably due to its density and smaller area as a result of the density. So there's definitely a need to look at our under partners and I don't mean to exclude the southeast Denver as well because I think the Trust for Public Land used a different yardstick, which was parks within a ten minute walk. And that's a different yardstick. And by that measure, I think South Southwest Denver's pretty, pretty much and equitably treated as well. I am I'm generally supportive of forwarding this to the voters because this is truly a municipal purpose. Councilman Lopez says providing for parks, among other things, is is one of the basic city municipal functions. And so this is well within the the realm and the ability of our voters to make the decision whether they want to tax themselves to do this. As Councilman Clark knows, however, I have had some some anxiety over the choice of the sales tax as the most regressive choice we can use. And yes, I know that in Denver, a lot of our sales tax has come from visitors and from people from outside the city, and not just from residents. But I do think about when I mentioned Brentwood, not have there's no park at all in Brentwood. And that's one of my more struggling working family areas that probably don't want to dig deeper in their pocket when they go to the store and buy school clothes for their kids and and pay a little bit more in taxes . I think the last time I actually looked at this, it's very outdated. Maybe 15 years ago when I was writing a story about a sales tax going on the ballot that the average household in Denver at that time spent about $36,000 in taxes, taxable retail transactions, if that's true and let me rounded up to 40,000 is probably in excess of that now. And I know a lot of our households don't even make that much in total, let alone spend that much on retail sales. But a household that spends $40,000 in in taxable retail sales under this measure would pay $100. We usually have when we have bond issues on the ballot, we're usually able to say with great specificity how much a mill levy increase would mean to the average house worth $300,000 or whatnot. So I just wanted to throw out there that that an average household that spends $40,000 in retail sales would spend would pay about $100 annually into this fund, not just for some perspective, I don't know how I feel about a one week delay, and I don't know if it's if it's needed. But there's one thing that we could do here on the floor right now as far as a very simple amendment that would help me get to a higher comfort level with the equity issue. And that would be if I could. Mr. President, just. I have a simpler one, actually. So we have we have competing friendly amendments. In on page five under I planning if what would really help me and I think maybe given some of the other remarks here tonight would really help me and maybe others feel that we could have more of a role in here would be if that paragraph included when the Parks and Rec Department does the five year plan, it doesn't just submit it to the Crabb and to the council, but it actually submits it for a required public hearing and adoption by the council as we do neighborhood plans . That would then mean that we don't just receive the plan in an email at some point say, Oh, thank you very much, and we read it, but it actually comes here for a public hearing and then we vote on it. And I could offer that very simply in a floor amendment, if that's acceptable to the other members and maybe subsequent members who speak might weigh in on that to let me know if there would be support for that. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilman. Councilman Brooks. Yeah, thank you, Mr. President. And I just want to say to for a start, just to everybody who's here, I appreciate you being here. I appreciate you staying for parking and going through security and sitting in these hard seats. Everyone that I see in these seats right now are some of our most staunch advocates in the city, either on both sides of this issue. And you guys are the reason we're going to be great as the city. So I appreciate you being here. Mr. President, I'll just say this to you that I love the story about and Councilwoman Gilmore saying the same thing. I love the story. Stories about what we used to do with what you guys used to do with young people. And I did the same thing, taking young people up in the mountains for ten years of my life and allowing them to enjoy, you know, the beauty and open space and get out of the hood of northeast Denver to enjoy that. And I think everything you said is spot on. You know, but that's not the issue before me tonight. All of those things are right, but that is not the issue. That doesn't help me to get to. Yes. Tonight, I think the Parks Department of my last seven years has improved over 95% of the parks in District nine , and it has transformed our district. And I want to thank you all for that. And I'm a big believer and advocate for parks. And, um, but as I, as I think about, you know, where we are as a city and as I think about as a, as a, as the President of city council now in this seat for as president for two years and now in this seat. I think about effectiveness. How can we be as effective as possible? And we're effective as possible by being strategic and making sure our priorities are in line. And we get our priorities in line through a really hard process of 13 really different individuals trying to come together and figure out what they're hearing from the community and when we can do the hard work of figuring that out. We are successful almost every time. Now there's always isolated situations where there's individuals from the community who say they want to push this forward, and that is what our democracy is all about, allowing those things to happen . I guess where I'm struggling here and you guys hurt me in the in the council meeting is I'm really struggling on how we're far behind in parks and we know that. But I'm really struggling by how far we behind. We are in mobility and housing and some of those other issues and how much people agree in the city of Denver. How much we keep hearing about it. And so I said I wanted to get some more data just for my district alone, because what no one is talking about is what happens when you have a great proposition on the ballot around parks and homeless mental health services, caring for Denver. And some would say in our day that the school ballot, the paying for the college ballot and what all these other things. So I said, let's just put them head to head in a district in District nine, very diverse District 17 neighborhoods. And this is what this is what happened. As I scroll. Get it up. So we had 265 people from 17 neighborhoods. 54%. And I ask those three questions. What would you support out of these three? 54% say caring for Denver. 31% said the Denver Public Parks Fund, which is before us today, and only 13% said the college affordability. The reality that is before us is that if we're not strategic as a city and as individuals, we will put competing issues on the ballot. And what I'm trying to it's not whether we like this or that, people do not judge like that. They are in silos. They're going to they're going to put things against each other. And my district just proved it. And so will that will this pass this council? Yeah, probably. It probably won't go on to the ballot whether we delay nor delay. But if this dies because of a lack of preparation, because we didn't have the hard conversations that everybody I'm just telling you as the president of council, I got the full language at the end of May. So how can I get my folks, all the people who are advocates on either side on board this and even understand where they are? I can't. So just because we didn't do that and it fails, then we're back here again. And so. I love parks and think we should fund them and think we can fund them. But we've got to have a much more inclusive process. And I know that's so frustrating for the prime members who talks about it every year. I know that's frustrating for you, but it's also frustrating for me as a president who as a former president, we have a president as a former president who wants and loves and think we should be doing more for parks. So we all find ourselves in a frustrating situation. So that's where I'm at tonight. I cannot support this even going to the voters. And the reason why I can't support this going to the voters. When we were in committee, I was going to support it, gone to the voters and let them make a decision. But now I have more evidence that shows me that we're just piling up on this ballot and there's a good chance that it might not succeed 50%, unless someone can give me some really good data of a head to head with the other issues on the ballot. So I will not be supporting this. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman. Councilman, new. Thank you, Mr. President, and thank you for bringing this bill forward. I really appreciate it. And I know our citizens will appreciate it. And in my district, we serve a lot and we get a lot of comments and and favorable opinions about our parks. They love our parks. And and we're so glad that we just had a recent plan by the Greenway Foundation to help develop the Greenway Cherry Creek Greenway, which is a spectacular plan. And so but this plan is no different than a lot of our other capital improvement plans we have in the city. You know, we have a great plan, but we don't have a way to fund them. We have no money to implement. And that's the thing that I think so attractive about this bill here is finally a dedicated revenue stream for our parks. Here's some plans we could have for our parks, and we will know that we'll have some money to implement. I think that it'll be very appealing to our voters. I think the two and a half cents for $10 is not a lot to ask. I think that there will be seen as a good investment for one of our greatest assets in our city, our parks. So I think it'll have great appeal. Some of the process questions we were talking about tonight, I think we could probably work out whether you vote for this dinner tonight or nine, but I think there are important but I think it shouldn't delay this bill tonight. So I'll be supporting this bill. And then I just surely encourage all our residents to have that great opportunity to vote, to make their own decision and put it on that ballot in November and let them decide. They may have competing issues and maybe a problem, but the voters can decide. They're smart enough to figure this out. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilman. Councilwoman Sussman. Thank you, Mr. President. I tend to be pretty practical about things like this, like this, and thinking through some of my colleagues comments, which I appreciate very much, and I've enjoyed listening to all the different points of view. I don't think a week is going to change much. It's not enough time. It's going to still come back next week. The busy lives, I just I just don't think that it makes sense just to give it one week. I, too, have had great pause on a bill that's going to require sales tax because of its aggressiveness. It it means that those of lesser income will pay a greater proportion of their income on the tax. But at the same time, I know, practically speaking, that getting a property tax is even is so unpopular and is, you know, rarely ever can happen, although we have very low property taxes. The argument that visitors will pay most of that. All right, that's fine. But that doesn't mean that the that the residents aren't going to pay more in taxes. It doesn't it doesn't reduce their tax obligation. It just adds to the pool of money, just, you know, practically speaking. So I think that and our big decision is here, are we going to refer this to the ballot? And so I think if you refer to the ballot, then the citizens can make up their own minds if they want to spend their money in this way, if this is something that is of value to them, that, yes, they are going to have a lot of things to choose among on the ballot. And many of them, not most of them that requires some funding, require it in a sales tax. I don't know if you add up, if they all passed, what the increase in our sales tax would be, but it'd probably be noticeable. But anyway, just allow the citizens to decide do they want to spend their sales tax money this way? I wish there were more details about the criteria. I know. We've had conversations about that and the expenditures and how that's going to expand. I, I think that is one of the the important things about this initiative that's lacking. But we had that dilemma with green roofs. It needed a lot more detail and we gathered quite a number of people from different points of view, certainly lots of different perspectives. And we hammered out a lot of details in about six months. So the concern that, well, we're going to get the money right away, we won't have a way to spend it. I think that many of these details can be worked out as we go along. And so I believe that is probably a good a good thing for us to put it on the ballot. I think parks do mean a lot to people. I trust the voter to understand what it means, and I trust the voter to know what the thing is they're going to be choosing between. And therefore, I'll probably I will be supporting this this evening. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman Flynn and Councilman Lopez. I'm going to go to Councilwoman Canete because, you know, in a way. All right, Councilman Flynn. Okay. I don't know what your desire is here, but I would like to offer an amendment. I think we can get this voted on final and get it on the ballot tonight with a simple amendment that that for members to consider. I know some folks on this side of the dais already have indicated they would support it. Very simple amendment that adds city council adoption of the five year plan as one of those sort of safety vows in looking at how the money is spent. If I could offer that now or do you want to hear from. Let's let's get through everybody and then I'll come back to you. And can I get clarification from our attorney over there that this amendment, we could still be voting on this at final if an amendment was passed, as Councilman Flynn is proposing? It's within the title. Yes, that's right. It doesn't change the title or description. Thank you very much. All right. Councilman Lopez. Thank you, Mr. President. I just wanted to make the point, I think, you know. Oh. You know, I just. I just wanted to make a point here. I mean, I think, you know, democracy is messy. Our ballot is going to be long anyway. You should see the ballots of other cities and how long they are. I think there's going to be an extraordinary amount of people who are going to be, you know, if the last three years that's two and seems like three years, at least at the last two years of really showed us anything and done anything is agitate people into action. And I think a lot of you can start seeing a lot of people really paying a little bit more attention. I hope I hope these to that ballot and Denver's changing in a way that I think a lot of folks are are showing not just appreciation for. For our public assets, but wanted to take it to another level. And I think this is just smart preparing that we have the finances and we have the mechanisms in place to do just that. Our city is growing. Our parks are going to be used and they're going to be activated. And I think this is a a way to finance them. I'm good to go tonight. Must be. But I'm very curious about this, the amendment, and I'm very curious about any other ideas moving forward. But I don't want to I don't want to belittle our voters. I don't want to belittle the ballot. I think folks are able to read through a ballot and do it in a way that that's intelligent and do it in the best interest of something other than themselves. I have a lot of faith in that. So thank you. Thank you, Councilman. Councilman, can you. Thank you, Mr. President, for your forbearance earlier. And then I also want to thank the folks who came today. I was somewhat surprised. I think I've been out of town since last Wednesday, and the only folks I had heard from up until that point were parks advocates. And so I wasn't totally prepared for the number of concerns and questions and other things that emerged over the last week and caught up on those. And so I don't like to bring up new ideas on the floor. It's not ideal, but I, I benefit from hearing this public debate. Councilwoman specimens questions were the ones that prompted for me some of those lessons we learned from the housing fund that frankly, until we're having the debate, I didn't get to. And so that's the value of the public debate. And because it brings up creative thinking and it triggers things. And so, you know, I apologize to make to my colleague because when you you know, you ask your colleagues where they at and how they feel about things. And some of these questions I didn't have fully formulated until I was listening and engaging because it came up here at the end. So that said, I am supporting this measure tonight and I want to just describe the two things, because I really respect council president and Councilman Brooks. It's going to take a while to get the titles right. Councilman Brooks is weighing of several different priorities. And so for me, just to say how I went through them on the housing question, this would be a different discussion if we didn't have a path towards a $300 million housing investment. Is it is it enough? Is it everything we need? Perhaps not for sure or not, but we I knew that we were on a path to a proposal that I could probably live with if a few details are hammered out correctly before I learned about this proposal. So to me, it wasn't it wasn't that this leaped ahead of housing. Housing was on a path. You know, we have we have a significant portion and it's on a path to being doubled. And I knew that at the point at which this arose. So so it would be a different debate if we maybe did need to look at the sales tax for housing. And but we were on another path by the time I heard about this second on transportation. You know, we haven't talked too much about the fact that there is a state measure on the ballot. That measure passes. It's going to bring some share back revenue to Denver directly, as well as the potential to get some state funded transportation within our jurisdiction paid for again. Will it solve all of it? No. What if it doesn't pass? Well, if it doesn't pass, that same sales tax capacity exists for us to consider for local use. And we're no worse off than we would have been if the state measure passes. So that's one consideration just about the transportation piece and the sales tax. So I also continue to hear that the administration is working on a package of other funding ideas, and I haven't seen that. But, you know, I mean, perhaps there are more creative ideas coming, but I do think that those are the trifecta of growth. So when I hear from the community about needs, housing, transportation and parks and open space for the healthy, balanced community that we need, I am thinking about those other pieces. So for folks who care about those, I just want you to know that I did think about them and weigh them coming to my decision on supporting this . The other thing I'll just say on the personal side is that, you know, I have been working with the community in Globeville to create an open space for eight years, and in part it's taken time because it's a brownfield and newsflash. That's where parks are going to come from. They're going to come from places that are dirty or used for something else, and that's frankly, where they've come from. In the past, many of our parks were, you know, dumping areas or, you know, landfills. So it's not what's new is what's old is new again, which is that it is the land that is in rough shape. But the second reason was this community had to fundraise. So the nonprofits are out there using settlement dollars and grant dollars, and they've only been able to fundraise for one phase of a multi-phase project. So it's not going to get funded. Is internal sidewalks that would make it more accessible for the disabled. What's not going to get funded is, you know, the play area for children to have rocks to interact with. So it will be a very passive open space, which is an asset in this community, has fought for it, but those later phases are not yet funded. And so the very first community led, you know, has an at large person. I work on policy a lot, I don't work a lot in projects. But the very first and primary community led, place based project I worked on and I'm still working on is, is only, you know, a third or half funded and it's because there is not this capital. And then the other thing, you know, and thinking about, I, I do believe that we I believe that given a little more time, we might be able to find a few word changes that might give folks some more comfort that they had been a part of shaping this. I think there's value in people feeling like they shaped something, but I accept my colleagues feedback that they're not interested in that delay. And it's at least by my count. And so there's no need to force that I will. Just say, though, that in my mind the lack of the of the wording tweak doesn't relieve us of the responsibility. So when I judged a poster contest for all Latino and African-American youth that participated in this poster conference defining neighborhood to them, every single one of them put in a park or an open space. They didn't put houses. They didn't put schools. They they really when they they define neighborhood each of them. So. So I believe this is in the heart of the youth of color that I've worked with. And I think it's our challenge. And I frankly think, you know, as the sponsor, when if, you know, if we don't take the delay, then it's going to have to work three times harder to show folks how the the practice will come into this and how those voices will come in that haven't been at these parks tables and how we make proud of inclusive without changing the structure of it. And so we got some work to do. I. I. So, so the lack of the wording change doesn't relieve us the responsibility. I'm committed to trying to bring ideas to the table and how to do that. I've named some technical challenges I think we're going to get over. I think this would be better maybe if we had a plan for year one and two. But but I because I have lived the need in in in the very communities that folks are concerned about being underrepresented. And I've interacted with those communities. I believe that there is a need and that they will benefit from this. And so I will be supporting it without a delay, since I don't think that's the will. But I do appreciate that humility is one factor in leadership, but boldness is another. And I think that boldness doesn't always come with perfection, but hopefully it comes with growth. And, you know, maybe we wouldn't find ourselves here again, but that if we do get a lesson from the voters, we'll learn it the hard way. And if they grace us with their permission, then we will do the very best we can to make up for anything we lacked on this front end. So thank you, Mr. President. I will be happily supporting this tonight. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman Flynn. Excuse me. Thank you, Mr. President. I would like to offer this amendment and just explain what it does. A very simple amendment that will ensure that tonight isn't the last time that the city council has any more than just a glance at the way these funds would be spent going down the line. It would it would require that instead of just the five year plan being submitted to us that the Parks and Rec Department would work with the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, as they always do in developing the plan, including a requirement for at least one public hearing and then submitting it to the Council for our adoption as we adopt neighborhood plans. So there's already there's already precedent for how we do these things. And it means that once this goes out the door tonight, we actually get to play a play another role in how the funds from the special revenue fund will be expended broadly, broadly, and we're not going to dictate projects or whatnot, but the way we adopt a neighborhood plan. So it might even be possible after we adopt this, Councilman Clark, that that the hillsides at Ruby Hill Park will finally get mowed. Right? Right. That's inside baseball. So. So I would like to offer the following motion. A following amendment. I move that council bill. What is this? 641 Council will 641 be amended in the following particulars? And I'm using the the version of the bill that is in our granicus system because the pagination is a little different on the print out on page five at line 34. After the word charter. Delete the words. Must submit a five year plan to the City Council and the Denver Parks and Recreation Advisory Board. And insert the following language. Shall work with the Denver Parks and Recreation Advisory Board to hold no less than one public hearing and submit a five year plan for the approval of the city council. That's the end. That's the end of the amendment. I just want to check with our council secretary. Is there anything else we need to do for Councilman Flynn to get that amendment on the floor? Second. I just wait when? Sorry. I get something. More than just saying. Well, technology catches up. Councilman Espinosa, are you in the queue to talk about the amendment? Yes. Okay. Could I because members don't have Mr. President, because members don't have the text in front of them. Can I read the paragraph as it is now so they understand the change? Yes, go ahead. Okay. The paragraph right now is paragraph II and a reads planning within one year of the adoption of this Article 12 and every five years thereafter. The manager of Parks and Rec actually says Park Manager Parks and Recreation as designated in accordance with section 2.2.4.2 of the charter, must submit a five year plan to the City Council and the Denver Parks and Recreation Advisory Board on the planned revenue uses in the parks trails. Open and open space fund. So what we're removing is the clause that just says they must submit the plan to us and we're substituting the language that says they shall work with the Parks and Rec Advisory Board to hold at least one public hearing and then submitted to the Council for our adoption. So that's the only change. And do you have any comments that you want to make about the amendment beyond reading it? Yes, Mr. President, just to reinforce that, what I've heard tonight from many of the members is that there's a need for it to. There's a need for someone to oversee and to have more voice in how these funds are spent. Having a public hearing in this room, having a public hearing at PARAB allows the public to have more input into how that spent. So we don't just send it out the door tonight and never see it again. And I think that would help to address some of the equity issues and help ensure that a public voice is put into this five year plan as it should as it's re adopted every five years. I don't see how any member of council. Could oppose giving ourselves more authority in this area. Thank you. They have to be. Thank you, Councilman Flynn. Madam Secretary, so we do have the motion on the floor and it's seconded. Ah, well, good for me to move to questions. Yes. Okay. Questions on the amendment, Councilman Espinosa, or comments on the amendment. Sorry. So I want to redirect to our city attorney, uh, to our legislative council because. I heard two things there. One was actual language to write in approval, but then the intent was adoption. I don't know if there's a difference in it, but I'm worried that if we get to a point where we formally adopt a plan, does it now become binding in such a way if it's all articulating very specific projects and that we could only deviate if we amend that plan? Because it's not going to be recommendation. I mean, advisory in the normal sense, I don't think. So I guess. My perspective is, is a concern more about the charter and that it vests a great deal of discretion with the person recreation. And so I think the best possible way to achieve a council is doing is to achieve it through an amendment to the charter that would go into this bill. But, you know, doing it on the floor, I think, can be difficult because we haven't had an opportunity to go back and look at the language in the in the charter and make sure that we're not conflicting. You have two issues here. One is approval of a plan by council, but then also adding in a process that doesn't exist in the charter right now. And a quick clarification on that, because I was told because of TABOR, we cannot amend the charter in another way as part of this bill, because you had mentioned about putting it in the bill in a as a charter change, but that's not allowed per TABOR because then it's not single subject. I'm not sure where you got that information, but I, I think that this is the substance of what we're talking about tonight could be put in this bill and not run afoul of Tabor. All right, Councilman Espinosa, anything else. So I can get out? And the question to Councilman Flynn, so is your intent to really have that direct action over parks or would you really just rather have the formal public input? And could we just do it with a required public hearing and not an actual adoption? No, the the the motion and I'm not really keen on taking taking out the council vote on it, but for the I would keep in the approval of city council. I don't see why we would hold a public hearing and then not a vote. Okay. Thank you. No further questions. Councilwoman Sussman. Okay, is this, like practical, this coming back to me? You know, we had the ballot issue on marijuana several times. We had the ballot issue on green roofs. And we did take time to look at it, to make a plan to execute the plan. And the council has the ability to change things six months after any ballot issue anyway. And I think that a lot of the processes that we established, both in marijuana and all the marijuana bills in the green roofs bills were probably even more detailed than your amendment has suggested about Council Council's ability to alter something. And I think our concerns about worrying about the criteria and how the money is going to spend, how are things that will be worked out afterwards. And I would not want to limit what I am hoping will be a representative committee from all sides looking at how to implement this in the best way to this kind, to just this way of encouraging or of allowing council to engage because council's going to be able to engage no matter what. And this amendment might create a process that a group that we got together to discuss wouldn't want. And so we don't need to make this happen now because we can make it happen later. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilwoman Ortega. Thank you, Mr. President. I think the major difference between this and those other. Processes that you spoke of, Councilwoman Sussman, is that currently the manager of Parks and Rec under our charter, has sole authority to make these decisions. And what we're talking about is giving council and the community a voice in that process for how we define those priorities with these new funds. And so I want to speak in support of the amendment that is basically asking for this body to approve the plan, and that we have the public hearing at Parab and the public hearing before city council that gives voice to the community who has not been privy to being involved in this process, in being able to weigh in on what those priorities should be, and looking at some of the criteria that should be in in that plan. And so I think it makes perfect sense. It's no different than when we adopted our housing fund and said we need a housing plan by which we will set priorities in terms of how those dollars are going to be spent. And this is this is very similar to that. So I think this makes perfect sense, and I think it gives even more confidence to the voters that we have a more clearly defined process that they get to have some input into. All right, Councilman. Mechanic. Thank you, Mr. President. I just want to just speak to the amendment for a minute, and particularly the concern. Plans are not they are not binding in the sense that it is not a list of funded projects. And so to the extent that, as we've learned, you know, whether it's an area plan or whether it's the housing plan, they're aspirational. And so I can't imagine that there'd be a way to violate it because you have to report on it. You can, you know, in the annual reporting, but there's there's nothing binding in the plan, legally speaking. And so I think that it's a good way to counterbalance the lack of certainty upfront with a a aspirational approval process that says our aspirations are this much on purchasing land, this much on maintenance. And then, you know, if it turns out that there's an amazing parcel that manager maintains her charter authority, she will be required to report to us under this. And so you can say here's what didn't go the way you expected and here's why. And it just it just I think, to me, creates the kind of, you know, transparency this body often requests and in in because there is so much less detail in the process here. To me, it seems like the simplest fix that we can do on the floor to just create a little more certainty in the process. And for me, it was important in working with Councilman Flynn and on this language that it moves parab up in the current language, Crabb receives the plan. This says The department shall work with Parab to develop the plan. And so that's the other component that I think is is helpful in in making it more community co-lead and then council check in at the end. So I'll be supporting the amendment. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman. Councilman Espinosa. Yeah, it was my my concern was that Parks already sort of operates, I hope, with our aspirations in mind. And that's what game plan is. And so my my thought was this would be more granular, more use of funds sort of the as we knew things were coming in. That's why we we have a sort of dialog with people more about projects. But if it's not that, I certainly have no reservations about getting to an approval. But I do think that this is going to really sound distorted from my own sort of feeling, but it respects the charter. Maybe what we do is we sort of put ourselves in a planning board role in that. We just actually make a recommendation to the manager of parks with an approval, approval, a comment or deny based on what we get out of that public hearing, because it is the manager of parks purview. But that's just food for thought things. This is a charter. All right. Thank you, Councilman Espinosa. Councilman heard it. It was really I'm just I'm trying to understand. If it's because, as Councilwoman Kennedy talked about, it's not binding. So couldn't council just do this without even adding an amendment? Like if we are concerned about the direction that the funding will go to can't council in just some capacity issue a statement or something. That's what I'm I'm trying to understand the the purpose of the amendment and and help me out, Councilman Flynn, if I'm just if I'm just missing a key component because as because as I was, I was sitting here thinking, well, what happens if we disagree with the recommendations of the parks manager and councilwoman? Can you answer that question and said, well, it's non-binding. So adding this to the language, well, is there something that council can just do right now? And I think Councilwoman Sussman was kind of implying that and just just thinking out loud, you know, if you. Had response to that. Councilman Hurt and. Thank you. Excuse me. This process. This amendment, rather, is modeled after Councilwoman Kennedy. You and I were conferring here earlier. It's modeled after exactly how we do neighborhood plan approval for the housing plan, which came to us for approval. So it's exactly the same processes that if. If the manager. No, it's not binding. If we don't do this, then there is no mechanism for public input other than I imagine the manager would come up with a process under her rulemaking. I can't imagine that there would be no public process, but this kind of sets the framework in which that would occur properly under the charter, through the Parks and Rec Advisory Board, and then come to us in the way the housing plan came to us for our adoption or not. We don't change any of it. As Councilwoman Keech said, it's aspirational. It's not doesn't list projects. So we don't change any that our option is only to vote yay or nay on it. It ensures that there is an open and public input process into that plan. That's the purpose of it. And if we don't pass it, then if we don't, if we see something in the plan that's given to us, then our recourse is, you know, to shoot off an email to the manager and say, gee, we don't like that. And but it's not out in the public. I would rather have that occur in the public than not. I do think Councilwoman Sussman was I see her. Side, but I appreciate I appreciate you saying that. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you. Councilman Herndon, seeing no other comments, I will just add that I think I think you and I think Councilman Flynn. Councilman, can you tell us or take I don't know who all came up with this down to the you have done a fantastic job. Hit the nail on the head just like game plan. And we have a game plan right now for a $78 million budget. We're going to add $45 million to have a plan specific to that, that goes through an established process that we have for plan adoption and allows everyone in this room to come back and to to come back to this microphone and say, are we on Mark? Are we not? Did we miss the equity piece? Did we do all of that, I think is really a fantastic compromise. I want to thank you for that and I will be happy to support it with that. Madam Secretary, can we do work on the amendment? Flynn. Hi. Gilmore. I heard in Cashman Can eat. Lopez I knew. Ortega I. Sussman No black eye. Brooks. I. Espinosa. No, Mr. President. I am our secretary. Please close the voting. Announce the results. Sorry. One person is still missing. Somebody has been located, but. I. All right. Now, closed voting in those results, 11 to 11, nine two nays. The amendment passes. Councilman Herndon, can you please make a motion to pass this bill as amended? Name is president with the council bill 641 be placed upon file as amended. Be placed upon consideration and do. It has been moved and seconded. I think that we have had a lot of discussion for tonight. Is there anyone who just can't live without us going straight to a vote? Councilman Brooks? You know, it's not going to be 20 minutes like some of my friends, but I just I just wanted to explain to the voters or my constituents right now. I did vote for the amendment because I think, you know, it speaks to equity. Much more community input should this pass. But because of the process, I cannot support this. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Councilman Brooks. Madam Secretary, roll call. I'm sorry. Oh. Councilman Herndon. Names. President, I'm. I. I was. Everybody else spoke. And it's just. And I will. I'll be briefer than others. I appreciate the the sentiment. And I can tell you right now, I think about multiple neighborhoods in my district where we have concerns about funding for parks, and that is a reality. I wish this process was more thorough. No one discounts this for parks, but no one discounts the need for sidewalks. No one discounts the need for other ask. And I wish we would as a body have done that because I. Do look at council. And Brooks and says something's going to get dropped because of this ask. And my fear is that it's going to be something that we cannot we can we don't have another way to fund. Like we're funding parks right now. And is it enough? No, but we're funding parks right now. There's some other ask on the ballot that the only mechanism we will have to fund them is through going to the voters. And so something I fear that's crucial to the city's progress is going to be. It's going to be. Dropped. And so I wish we would have taken that into consideration before doing this. That being said. We're not approving it because if it was an improvement, I would be a no. Not to say that no one loves Parks more than I do with my think about taking my son to Parks frequently. But I just really hope that as voters, we take a hard look at this come November, because it is something that there there will be some. It will be an interesting time for the next few months. And so I, I, I struggled with this because I've heard both sides of a very, very thorough, thorough debate. But sending this to the voters for a question for them to decide in November, I think this is worthwhile. But recognize the repercussions of each vote you make because you will be making multiple votes come November. So I will be supporting this. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilman Herndon. Seeing no other comments. Madam Secretary, roll call. This is to pass as amended. Yes, that is the motion on the floor. Black eye. Brooks Espinosa. Hi, Flynn. I feel more Herndon. I Cashman can eat. Lopez. I knew Ortega. Sussman Hi, Mr. President. I. Madam Secretary, please close the voting, announce the results. We're missing one somebodies person. Push their button. 12 eyes, one name, 12 eyes. One day accountable. 641 has passed as amended on Monday. August 13th, 2018. Council will hold a required public hearing on Council Bill 8.0617 Changing the zoning classification of 2500 East 44th Avenue 4348 Combined Street 4301 and 4349 Elizabeth Street in the Illyria Swansea never had any protest against Council Bill 80617 must be filed with the Council no later than Monday, August nine. So you no other business before this body? This meeting is adjourned. The.

Recommendation to direct City Manager to identify potential funding sources for the acquisition of vacant property between Baker Street and Wardlow Road adjacent to the Los Angeles River for public purpose and return findings to the City Council in Closed Session. (District 7)

LongBeachCC_05172016_16-0437

Item 12 Communication from Council Member Dunga Recommendation to direct the City Manager to identify potential funding sources for the acquisition of vacant property between Baker Street and Wardlow Road District seven. Councilmember Yanga. Thank you. Before we get into a brief staff report on this matter, I want to make some corrections. First of all, the parcel that we're talking about is 20 acres, not 15. And also, I would want to request that once the information is gathered and the recommendation is going to be made, that it be made in public to the city council. I'm sure that any future discussions regarding, uh, the, the report that we would get back would have to go into closed session eventually. But we'll cross that bridge when we, when we cross it. But I would like to have a public open meeting when that report first comes out. So I want to make those two corrections at the present time. If I can have. Mr. Conway, I guess, uh, and perhaps director copy from the Public Health and Human Services Department to step forward. I'd like to for them to make a few remarks regarding this property and where we stand with it currently. As Vice Mayor. Council members, the staff were given by Mike Conway, the director of Economic and Property Development. And we also have with us Kelly Colby, the director of Health and Human Services. Vice Mayor Long, members of the City Council. A little bit of background oil operators as a consortium of a number of independent oil producers in and around Long Beach who achieve synergy and efficiency in combining their oil production and exploration efforts. The subject property was acquired in 1927 by oil operators and has been leased to a number of a variety of other oil operators. The city acquired the areas in blue on this slide for open space purposes in 2001 and 2002. Through cooperative efforts with the Trust for Public Lands utilizing park bond money. The city received a grant from Rivers and Mountains Conservancy in July of 2001 for $5 million to acquire the remainder parcel, which is the 20 acre piece under discussion this evening. However, an agreement with oil operators could not be reached and the funding was returned. The 20 acre parcel has been used to separate brine from petroleum. The brine was then treated and disposed and the petroleum was sold. Operations ceased in approximately 19 1998, and development efforts have continued since that time for uses, including self-storage, the residential cemetery and open space. The property is primarily zoned to see us for commercial storage uses and a portion of the property is owned r-1 one for single family residential uses. The property was the subject of a consent decree entered into in August of 2002, requiring characterization, remediation, quarterly reporting and debris cleanup on the 20 acre parcel. Oil operators has complied with the consent decree and is no longer subject to its requirements. The site was identified in 1973 and the open space element of the city as general plan. And in 1989 the site was included in Recreation Commission's Park Acquisition Plan. In 1996, the site was included in the L.A. River Master Plan, and most recently it is included in the Lower Los Angeles and San Gabriel Rivers and Mountains Conservancy Master Plan. The site is currently undergoing environmental remediation. The timing and cost of which are not entirely known. The property is also currently in escrow and under contract for sale, although a development proposal has not yet been submitted to the city. So in summary, the site has long been contemplated for open space and related uses. Funding for acquisition has been the most significant impediment to acquisition of this parcel, and that concludes my summary. Thank you. Perhaps we could have a report from Director Colby in regards to the cleanup that's been taking place over the last several years. Good evening. I'm going to turn my time. Over to Nelson Kerr, bureau manager for Environmental Health. Okay. Thank you. This site has been under the the health department's jurisdiction only for the basin clean ups, which is just the soil around that, the settling bay since we've been doing what we call bioremediation on the site where basically we are aerating out the soil and the the crude oil naturally is dissipated. And I fail to mention that that's the key constituent right now on the property that we're concerned with this crude oil. I did have a conversation with the consultant last night. We're about 80% clean on the property. There are a few areas of concern, the few pockets that will need to have some further remediation done where bioremediation will not be effective. And this is down to about ten feet below the surface. So that's that's the status of where we're at right now. Okay. Thank you. Of course I have I have some questions that are going to be asking. But in summary, this lot has been vacant for many years now. Some of my predecessors have been approached or were approached by some interested parties in developing the land into housing or into a storage facility as it is currently zoned. One councilmember whom I know who I know very well, told me that her term during the City Council she would receive two or three requests for meetings to talk about the old operators property, to discuss and share plans, and on how it would be developed. But none of those came to fruition, at least not until now that we have now. In my short stint here a year and a half, I've had three interested parties come to me to share with me their their views on this property. And we still are at the same point, there is no application for development of the land. So I just want to make that very clear that there's still nothing there at the present time as Mike which was kind of kind of Mr. Conway a very of share his summary there has been. Some activity with the with that land presently. And there's also been some remediation done. However, because it's been so, so long and because the remediation is is intense, I think that when we look at the possibilities of acquiring this parcel would require quite a bit of cleanup. It's my understanding perhaps the representative from the Health Department could help me clarify with this is that there are several different layers of of soil that would be they would need remediation. The highest standard of remediation would be obviously to clean it up to the point where it can be appropriate for housing or any other kind of a daily living type of activities. And then the remediation lessons as you go, different uses of the lease being what it is for now for storage where you would just basically cement it and lock everything down and that would be the least impactful for whatever use it is at that time. However, there is that in between the highest being housing, the lowest being storage, and then somewhere between or usable space such as open space. And that's one of the things that I'm looking at in terms of trying to develop some kind of mechanisms that would allow the city to purchase the land and have it restored or revitalized . The the present efforts that we've done as as has been described, it's it's been part of the plan with with a river link proposal, a project that I think I gave my my colleague a copy of. And it'll be exhibit 19 on page 12 where you could see that. And as you as you heard Mr. Conway, the Rivers and Mountains Conservancy did make an effort to assist the city of purchasing that land highway that that money was given back. So it's going to be an effort to to reopen that possibility. They have made some several efforts already to look at this possibility. I've sent letters to the Department of Toxic Substances Control, the State Lands Commission, Rivers and Mountains Conservancy, and to our legislators. Congressman Alan Lowenthal. Congresswoman Janice Hahn. Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon. Senate Pro-Tem. President Kevin De Leon. Supervisor Ken Duncan. RB Senator Ricardo Lara and Assemblyman Patrick O'Donnell. And I've asked for their assistance in trying to determine what is available out there that could help the city look into this project and making it available for open space. So I want to at this point, I guess we could go to to the public, see what their views are and share their ideas and then bring it back. Actually, yes. But if I can go to Councilmember Richardson as a second year. I stand in support of Councilmember Garrincha. Wonderful. Thank you. Is there any member of the public that wish to address Council on item 12? Please come forward. State your name. My name is Miranda. I live in that neighborhood there that's adjacent that blue square. I'm actually the home on that corner. And so we've seen a lot of activity both on the positive and not so positive side in the years that I lived there. When we purchased our home, there were discussions about the potential use of that land. And I would speak for my neighbors. We've all been very hopeful that that land would be developed and cleaned up. There have been many issues around that property and we've been promised a lot of things. One of the things obviously was the park. So we did get that cute little Baker Street Park that we're very thankful for, although there's been some additional issues with that park being placed there. I personally would love to see that developed into public use that would be to benefit of the community. Some of our major concerns with any of those proposed developments would be access to the area currently that Wardlow Street. I don't know if you can pull that map back up, but that Wardlow a little Wardlow that is adjacent. Big Wardlow is a very narrow street and currently parking is allowed on both sides of that street. So any time you go down that street, one car has to pull over so that the other one can get by. And that's on a daily basis just getting into our current neighborhood. I can't imagine that any more activity on that land would create a bottleneck and problems. There's also a blind corner now because of that area that they the little park that's now the pit area. So it's caused a lot of problems there as well. So if anything is developed on that land, I would love to see access from the main street into that area so that no more no more increased traffic is brought into that community. They're speeding down that street, a lot of speeding because people think it's a free for all. It's a very wide open street all along golden. I'm no speed bumps, even though we've requested for them have been added. There's a park there now, so cars constantly run into the gate. There's no security for the children. There's no speed control. And so people think it's a great place to park there and smoke and do all kinds of things at all hours of the day and night. And so even though the park is very welcomed, there wasn't much thought put into the repercussions of increased traffic both by foot and by car into the area. So I'm really nervous about what they put there because that's only going to, you know, impact that as well. It's also caused a problem with it being vacant because there's so many homeless folks now with the closure of the golf course right above that area there. So we have homeless encampments and that's brought a lot of problems. Truly homeless people and undesirables as well. There's also because there's nothing there now, there's a lot of dust. So the quality of air and soil and water is of concern. And the owners of that property have spoken to us. But I'm not completely convinced they've been completely straightforward or honest about all that they know. So I feel that if it was allowed to be developed, that more cleanup could be done. There's a lot of illegal activity that goes on in there, including drug trafficking and of course, the speed and traffic that accesses that area. So if anything, please, is develop there, I would please beg you that there be Access Streets, consideration and speed control. Thank you so much. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good evening, Vice Mayor and members of the City Council. My name is Joan Greenwood. I reside at 2091 San Francisco Avenue in the district of Long Beach. I am the president of the Wrigley Area Neighborhood Alliance, and our members stand firmly in support of a low impact development of this area. We desperately need more park space in Wrigley. We have 114 acre park for almost 30,000 residents. We are nowhere near the eight acres per thousand residents that the city has set. A goal is and this is the last viable piece of property for that purpose. We need another senior center in Long Beach and this would be a good location for one. We could use a nature center west that would be low impact native natural habitat. Now, one of the things about in-situ bioremediation is the planting of many drought tolerant native plants, especially grasses, will hold down the dust and will facilitate the bioremediation without having to move the dirt around. That is a viable approach and there is major funding with brownfields and other areas. The other thing is that particular property would serve as a superior urban forest buffer for that neighborhood because they live in a corner with some of the worst air pollution around there, south of the four or five downwind of the seven, ten and downwind of major refineries. I cannot imagine anyone wanting to develop homes on that property, knowing what they should know about what's going on around them in terms of the need to improve our air quality. So therefore, we have been working on this for many, many years. I was the senior project manager on the Long Beach River link phase one project. We held 12 neighborhood community meetings from the mouth of the L.A. River to the boundary with Paramount. Back then, they looked at putting in an amphitheater. There's also an historic wetland that was formerly on that property. The Coastal Conservancy in the late nineties was interested in it. Many, many organizations were interested in it. We tried to get it into a redevelopment zone by making it contiguous to the West Park, and that failed. And quite truthfully, where this has had such high importance in so many of the city's planning, and yet we've let it fall through the cracks. I think we need the citizens of Wrigley deserve a strong effort by the city to try to purchase that property, because I don't think we should start phase two of River Link until we've completed Phase one. Thank you for your time and attention. Next speaker, please. Good evening. Members of the council. My name's Rene Lawler. I live in the seventh District and I represent a minority organization, a nonprofit, the Wrigley Equestrian Homeowner's Association. We have been struggling for many, many years to to retain our functionality and survive within the community. And open space and open space adjacent to the L.A. River is critical to to our survival. The I would like to focus my comments to the entire council, but specifically to Councilman Urunga and also Councilman Austin. Councilman Austin has a unique opportunity. Congratulations to you being assigned a member of the task force for the L.A. River revitalization. Because of that fact, he works directly with state legislature speaker Assemblyman Rendon, and that task force was established with the intent to revitalize the lower L.A. River. The reason for that task force and for that legislation, which became effective law in January, is the fact that the southern reaches of the L.A. River. I have not been given the same attention that the Upper River has, and there is a complexity of unique communities within the lower reaches, such as the equestrian community that have been sorely missed with regard to planning and preservation and and protection of the open spaces needed for these communities. So I encourage you, Councilman Austin, with the task force, because you have such a great opportunity with the Resource Committee to to look at outside funding sources other than within the city. You'll be working with the Mountains and Rivers Conservancy already. You have a great number of individuals that are coming to the table, and now is the opportunity to be able to utilize those resources and protect communities such as the equestrians. This particular site is actually comprised of multiple parcels, so it's not just one big parcel. There are actually multiple parcels and several of the parcels do have an equestrian history. So for those of the community that aren't aware, the Long Beach Mounted Police used to actually reside in retain facilities on several of these parcels. Currently, the County of Los Angeles is proposing a public equestrian arena as an overlay behind the the ten homes, one of which where I reside in. And that public arena will actually negatively impact the homeowners and what we have to utilize. We would request that you would consider working with the county supervisors office, putting the public equestrian rest area in this location, and finding the funding resources in order to do that and not ruin what we currently have. Thank you. Good evening. My name is Candice Meade and I've lived in Wrigley for almost 30 years and years ago, several neighbors and I spent quite a few Saturdays providing input to the general plan. I can't honestly remember it was 2020 or 2030, but it was thoughtful input and everyone requested open space. I specifically remember this parcel because there was a lot of discussion about it. So we would like open space and I and I am happy to see this this put forward tonight for funding. So as you know, open space is not plentiful on the West Side like it is on the east side. And I do support the the identifying funding for the purchase of this property in closed session. I would very much like to see a discussion of this property in open session because the property is highly toxic and it needs to be made safe. That is our number one priority for all of us. I'm very happy to see the city stepping up to do the right thing, and I thank you very much for this opportunity. My name is Richard Sherman. I live at 602 West 37th Street in Wrigley Heights. Most of our I plan on things already being covered, so I'll make it pretty short. I just want to say that Long Beach, West Long Beach is very poor park poor assembly speaker Brendan's Abbie 530 has made $100 million available pardon me to purchase land and make improvements along the southern L.A. River. This property is the only riverside site of its size available in Long Beach. I just want to mention that the same developer is going to build 131 tiny lot homes on the beautiful Boy Scout Park in North Long Beach. He also seeks to build 275 tiny lot homes in Wrigley Heights. That would double the number of homes in Wrigley Heights. I'd just like to mention that years ago, when they wanted to build some stuff over there, the traffic engineer said that it was not possible to go out to Golden Avenue because it's on a high speed curve, going uphill over the bridge, over the river. Anyway. I would love for the city to obtain this property. I just hope that it isn't a ploy on behalf of oil operators to get a higher price from the developer property or stick it to Long Beach with their highly polluted site at an unreasonable cost. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Regina Taylor. I'm a resident of the Wrigley District 3206 Oregon Avenue. I, too, am very much in support, as some of you know, of trying to keep this open space. Despite the fact that we have big lots in Wrigley, we really are sitting on each other's laps. Um, I did notice that the original proposal, the way it was written, was indicated 17 to $22 million per acre, and that has been removed. I don't know whether that's significant or not. Also, you had mentioned that there is no terms contract on the table or someone coming forward with an application willing to build or to buy it. How long is this directive to the staff? What period of time is this for? Is there an end to it? A month, two months? And would we be jettisoned or would they be redirected to stop pursuing funding if there was an application on the table? Whatever the term is for someone to want it to build or to use it. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good evening, council members. My name is Robert Richardson and I live at 525 or 37th Street in the Wrigley area. It's a great neighborhood. We have one way in and one way out. I've been living in that particular house for 35 years and I just want to speak at the ground level of all my neighbors who's died of cancer. And there's a lot of them right now walking around with cancer because of that Baker oil area back there. And as you go back to right now, all is going up as we speak. The area cannot be cleaned up. It's just been like that for 35 years. We get odors and it's just it's a bad sight. But whatever you put. There, please do not put any single family Holdens because you know their kids. We have kids up there and you. Know, they're our life and that's our future. And whatever you do. Please do not put any single family homes. I think it'll just be field and capped and be done with it. Thank you. My name is Lena Hayek and I actually also live in Wrigley and I manage the whole Golden Ranch away. And there's ten homes of us that are right there, a Golden Ranch. And right behind us is Countryside Lane one and countryside lane two. That should tell you a little bit about how compacted we are. I've also spoken with James Stein, the owner of the Oil Operation Land, and I think the North Division Department for always coming out when we've needed them for help with the homeless, drug activity, etc. I think we call them about ten times a week. So I'm also in favor of the open space. We currently have about two neighbors who are suffering from cancer. And, you know, we went to these meetings where Tesoro was there with the environmental speakers who told us that basically we had nothing to worry about. So I don't know. Like Brenda said, is it a watered down version of what the truth is or are we just blinded to what will happen with the land? So. Councilman Aranguiz, thank you for bringing it up. I would like. The. Land acquisition to go to the city, obviously, and to leave it open space and a lot of great things that Joan had mentioned regarding why we want to push for for that. And just remember, I mean, I understand many of you probably do not live there and you don't see the activities in and out daily and the things that we go through as a community trying to just keep a strong support of what our land would look like. If you have high density buildings, they are single homes, etc.. So anyway, I just wanted to say that thank you for your time. We certainly appreciate you listening to us and our concerns. Thank you. If he comes down, council up. I agree with everything that been said and I don't think anybody that sits at the council could disagree with anything that's been said. The only concern I have is that when the city acquires property, a lot of times it seems like it's sold at a much less value than we acquired it for. And that's concerning to me. $20 million. If their funds come from outside the city, that would be tremendous. I mean, it would save us a lot of money they could use. Instead of a sales tax to provide infrastructure. And it does affect everybody around there. The wind blows. It does smell, you know, stuff oozes. I mean, very few of you live around there that you don't know what it's like. I remember when they scraped the cap off the other dump we have here in Long Beach. And everybody was upset about that overall Pacific Coast Highway. Remember that a couple of years ago. And that was a tremendous problem. So I support Perch. It'd be great, but let's use it for residents. Make it a part. Don't sell it to a developer that's going to overbuild at a cheap price. That's not what you're here for. You're here to do what's best for us. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Steele. Councilmember. Well, first of all, I want to thank all the speakers who came forward and shared their ideas and their perspectives on this parcel of land that is available. I think we have an opportunity here for the city to increase our park space. We need more open space. The seventh District is especially especially in need of more open space, and this would be a great opportunity to do that. So what I'm asking basically is your support in directing staff to pursue some some avenues of being able to finance for funding. It is my intent to minimize any kind of use of city funds to acquire this partial land and hopefully it can be done through either has been mentioned through a cap and trade money that that might be available out there through the river link efforts that are there through the 8530 funding that's available to connect the river . And this this is an excellent opportunity here to connect this parcel of land with the river and with other activities that would be enjoyed with the activities that that are already set in motion for the river in terms of for where it starts to where it ends here in Long Beach and brownfield designation would certainly help be a big help towards that. So I'm asking staff to go ahead and do that. And perhaps this would be an opportunity to to discuss how long do we do this? Is there a. Time limit that we need to put on this in terms of what efforts we need to put. I know we're coming on to a new budget season for the state as well as for the city, and perhaps the city manager can can give me or give us a somewhat of a lay of the land and what awaits us for the future in this effort. Vice mayor, council members. We can probably certainly come back with 90 days with thoughts of where funding sources might be or might not be. I mean, this is going to be something very, very creative. Certainly the city doesn't have to purchase it, but we would we could certainly outline that very quickly and get direction from the council . I'm in the process of contacting our legislators to have a face to face with them, to talk about this project, in particular, to see if appetite available for them in terms of what they might be able to make available towards towards helping us acquire this land. So I'd be more than willing to help in this effort. And certainly my my office's is is available to help in any way that we possibly can with with pushing this forward. So I ask for when it comes to my my colleagues or support on this. That I thank you, Vice Mayor. I really want to thank our counsel, Roberto, you know, for his efforts to create an open space, you know, in our community. And I'm enthusiastic supporting your effort. You know, we can find a way to create Eldorado Park experience in our community that has an open space in parks. That would be for all of Long Beach to enjoy. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman Andrews, we have no further comment on this item. Members, please cast your vote. Motion carries. Next item, please. Okay. Actually, 1/2. Okay. Thank you. I apologize for coming late. I was at the one of the commencements for for Cal State, Long Beach. So let me move on to the agenda. We're going to I know we have a time certain for our hearing and also just to just add our offices, just because I know she's here and I want to make sure that we we get to this item quickly as well. Can we just do item 21st before we get to the hearing? Which is the Jose ordinance. So Madam Clerk, if you can just read item 20, please.

A bill for an ordinance adopting a new Article IX of Chapter 28 of the Revised Municipal Code concerning “Prohibition of Conversion Therapy.” Amends Chapter 28 of the Denver Revised Municipal Code (DRMC) by adding Article IX concerning the prohibition of conversion therapy for minors. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 12-19-18.

DenverCityCouncil_01022019_18-1508

Thank you, Councilwoman Gilmore. Madam Secretary, would you please put the next item on our screens? And, Councilwoman, can you just go ahead with your comment? Thank you, Mr. President. Two bills up tonight. So my apologies to my colleagues, but it's an exciting night. This Bill 1508, is about banning the practice known as conversion therapy. It isn't easy to be someone different than the world expected you to be, to love or want to be with someone that you were never told about in the fairytales that were read to you. To want to be a different gender, to be a different gender than you were raised. I know a little bit about this path because I had to come out to myself and to the world in my early twenties. Loving someone does not make you sick physically or mentally. Being a man or a woman or living outside those labels if you don't fit them neatly, does not make you sick mentally or physically. But shame and rejection make people sick. Shame and rejection that teach you that if you fail to meet the expectations that your religion or your family or your community has, then you are wrong and you don't belong. Each human being among us, we all need to feel like we are accepted by our families, by our communities, and we all need to be loved. And when the message someone receives is you can't get those things unless you change a fundamental part of who you are. You make someone sick. You put them at risk for depression, anxiety, for wanting to not live anymore because there's no way to reconcile something in you that can't change and an expectation that makes you wrong for being that way. Conversion therapy sometimes uses harsh and punitive techniques to try to reinforce this change that it seeks to make people go through. And many people, including folks who led the movement and founded the practice, I did a lot of research over the last few months, and many of the people who started this practice have since denounced it after seeing the harms it has caused the long list of folks who've lost their lives after going through this practice. So when it fails, the consequences are very real. So today's bill ensures that no minor in the city and county of Denver will be subjected to this practice in the form of therapy. Just like we protect minors from other things that could hurt them physically or mentally. We will be protecting them from this practice going forward. I'm very proud to be a part of the conversation that was really led by our LGBTQ commission, which is all volunteers. These are folks from every walks of life some straight, some gay, some transgender, and they all work together to raise this issue and bring it to Councilman Clark, myself, the mayor's office. I want to thank the mayor's office for embracing this and really putting a lot of work into making sure that we could get it done as quickly as possible. And even though we're only on first reading tonight because it's such an important moment, I just wanted to acknowledge the folks who may not be able to be here to tell their own stories about how shame and rejection and attempts to convert them may have. We have harms them, but we're here tonight for them. And I think this is a really important way for our community to affirm that we do love and accept people and we're here to support them through their journeys, not to reject them. Thank you. Council President. Thank you, Councilman. Can you thank you for your words. I can't say it. I can even approach saying it how you said it. I just want to add an amen and then also a thank you to the commission, to the administration, to the office of the city, the city attorney's office for all the work going into this . And I'm so excited to have this on first reading. I'll be even more excited next week when we get to put it through on second reading. So thank you. Thank you. Thank you. All right. That concludes the items that have been called out. All other bills for introduction are ordered published, and we're now ready for the block vote on resolutions and bills on final consideration. Council members remember that this is a consent or block vote and you will need to vote I. Otherwise, this is your last chance to call it an item for a separate vote. Councilman Brooks, will you please put the resolutions for adoption and the bills on final consideration for final passage on the floor? Thank you. Mr. President. I do move that all the resolution be adopted in final session, be placed upon final consideration, and do pass in the following orders. 1445 1412 1447 1448 1449, 1481 1327 1413 1415 1451. Sloan up here 1452 1453 1454 1485, 1487, 1498, 1266, 13, 14, 1446, 1462, 14, 18, 1434, 14, 64, 14, 28. All series in 2018. Thank you, Councilman Brooks. It has been moved and seconded. Madam Secretary, roll call. Black. Hi, Brooks. Hi. Espinosa. Hi. When I. Gilmore, I Herndon. I. Cashman. I can teach. I knew Ortega I. Susman. I. Mr. President. Hi. I'm Secretary. Please close voting announced the results. 1212 eyes. The resolutions have been adopted and bills have been placed upon final consideration and do pass since there are no public hearings. And if there are no objections from members of Council, we will not take a recess.

Recommendation to declare ordinance approving and adopting the Official Budget of the City of Long Beach for the Fiscal Year 2020-2021, creating and establishing the funds of the Municipal Government of the City of Long Beach and appropriating money to and authorizing expenditures from said funds for said fiscal year; declaring the urgency thereof, and providing that this ordinance shall take effect at 12:01 am. on October 1, 2020, read and adopt as read. (Ordinance No. ORD-20-0037)

LongBeachCC_09152020_20-0876

Motion carries. Thank you. Next 1828 please. Report from Financial Management Recommendation to declare ordinance approving and adopting the official budget of the City of Long Beach for the fiscal year 2022 2021. Declaring the urgency thereof and providing that this ordinance shall take effect on October 1st, 2020. Read and adopted as read. I have a motion and a second. I have a motion by Councilmember. I think it's Austin and Councilman. Second Rate. Councilwoman Price. Any further comment? Yes. We have Dave Shukla. Hello. This you could resident of third. No further public comment. Thank you. That concludes public comment. Thank you. Thank you. That concludes the three budget items. All three of those budget items are now complete. You need to. Do the roll call. Vote for item number 28. Oh, I'm sorry about that. Right. Thank you. District number one. By. District two. By. District three. I. District for. I. District five. I. I. District six. Right. District seven. I District eight. I District nine. I. Motion carries. Thank you. Next, we're going to move on to we have three hearings. So let's go out and go through all three of those hearings, starting with hearing number 17.

A bill for an ordinance amending the Denver Zoning Code to allow fresh produce and cottage food sales as a home occupation. (LAND USE, TRANSPORTATION & INFRASTRUCTURE ) Approves a text amendment to the Denver Zoning Code to allow fresh produce and cottage food sales as a home occupation. A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD AT LEAST FOUR WEEKS AFTER PUBLICATION. The Committee approved filing this bill at its meeting on 5-13-14.

DenverCityCouncil_07142014_14-0398

Speakers are prohibited from using profanity or making personal attacks during their comments. Audience members Please understand that council members use electronic devices for various kinds to access the materials relevant to the public hearings before us. Be assured, however, by mutual agreement and common practice of the City Council, these devices are not being used for texting, emailing or other communications during our public hearings. And we will begin with Council Bill 398 as amended. Councilwoman Kenney So will you please put Council Bill 398 on the floor? I will. Mr. President, I move that council bill 398 be placed on final consideration and do pass. All right. We are catching up with the technology for a movement. And in a second it has been moved and seconded. The public hearing for Councilor Bill 398 is continued from Monday, June 16, 2014. We have five individuals to speak this evening. I'm going to call up the first five if you can make your way to the podium here at the front. That will help speed up the proceedings. We have our five our Mr. Texter. Mr. SEKOU. Mr.. KORNACKI. This is Grant and Mrs. Glassmaker. So those five can feel free to make your way to the podium. And we will begin with Mr. Texter. That tax of 4535. Julian Street, Denver. Growing fruits and vegetables in the city seems like a good idea. Maybe making a few dollars selling it isn't all that bad. However, on July 9th, a homeless man sleeping in a Denver alleyway beneath plastic sheeting was run over by a recycling truck. In the meantime, through Denver's Rent a Cop program, the Downtown Denver Partnership is sanitizing the 16th Street Mall for the enjoyment of tourists. It seems that instead of passing this ordinance, the city would bring more credit. To itself if it bought. The produce and distribute it on the mall. To the neediest of its citizens. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. TEXT. Mr. Sekou. My name is Chairman Siku. I am the founder organizer of the Black Star Action Movement for Self-defense. We unconditionally support this ordinance, which will legalize what folks have been doing since the last 60 years. I've been born with or without permission of government because it was a practical thing to do. And when I was growing up, there was canning going on in my house. We were sharing that with neighbors and sometimes there was a bathroom. You know, I'll give you this a can of peas and you give me some cabbage or some greens or some yams and whatnot. And so it's nice to be able to say that people can now come out from the shadows of illegality and do something that makes some sense without any fear of being prosecuted or persecuted, for having the ability to do something that we were made to do as human beings. And that was to grow our own food and feed ourselves without the interference of anybody, as long as we were preserving the land so that we can continue that on and make the land better for the next generation so they could do the same thing. And so it makes sense. And so we thank counsel for coming together, because I know this vote is going to be unanimous, because the truth is, you've already made up your mind. It was in subcommittee. Once it comes up, once the horse get out, the barn is a done deal, even when it's close. If you understand the process and I come to accept that as just part of the way we do what we do down here after coming here for three and a half years to study and research the process. So congratulations on having the common sense to let folks do what's been practical all my life. Thank you very much. Thank you. Mr.. Q Mr.. KORNACKI. Thank you, Mr. President. My name is Eric Renacci. I live at 160 Hooker Street in the Burnham neighborhood. I shared the previous speakers enthusiasm for this bill. It's about time that we return to the common sense practice of feeding ourselves and feeding our neighborhood. I'm extremely proud to represent the Sustainable Food Policy Council of Denver today, where we took up this issue about two years ago as something that not only made sense, but we also knew that it would make an incredible impact on communities throughout Denver, particularly the low income and underserved communities that do not have access to healthy food . I also an executive director of a nonprofit called Revision and Rework in the Southwest Corridor, primarily the Westwood neighborhood where Councilman Lopez, just out of faith, invited us in 2009 to come meet residents of the community that I think we're tired of not having the power to bring a grocery store into their community. And we're suffering from some of the worst diet related health effects in the entire city of Denver. And we started with a very basic premise of teaching people to grow their own food, utilizing their own land. What started in 2009 with seven families, I'm very proud to say, is over 300 families in southwest Denver this year growing their own food and feeding their neighbors. And last year alone, we produced over £20,000 of food. These are many small time small households that are starting a ten by ten plot in their own yard. And what we came to find is that not only were they producing such an abundance for their own family, but they were sharing with their neighbors whether it was an extended family, someone at their church, someone at their school. But there was clearly enough surplus to go around. In addition, many of these families live on less than $15,000 a year. That's self-reported. And so we said, hey, would you be interested in selling your own food? And every one of them said, yes. How do I go about doing that? So we're in the process of starting a community owned grocery store. You may have heard that in the mayor's State of the City address today, but one of the most immediate solutions is allowing people to set up a stand at their house and say, Come buy my produce from their neighbors. So I think, Councilwoman, can each four, four spearheading this bill and everybody else that has been in support of it. And I thank you for taking it up today. Thank you, Mr. KORNACKI. Beverly Grant. Greetings, Honorable Council members. I appreciate this opportunity to speak before you. I live at 3615 York in the Cole neighborhood. I would also like to thank Councilwoman CORNISH, Councilwoman Shepherd in her absence and Councilwoman Brooks, because they were kind of like the trio that spearheaded this movement. A couple of things I would like to share. I have been working for the past six, seven years in our local food movement. My work has been primarily focused in northeast Denver, which is a food desert neighborhood. And this particular legislation, in addition with the agricultural food producing legislation that's already passed and the Kurdish Food Act, plus this one that's on the table right now, lay a strong foundation to strengthen our urban ag movement, because we'll have fresh agricultural products, value added foods that can spurn a lot of neighborhood economics, that little bitty pockets block by block. You heard Eric story of 300 neighbors in a neighborhood. I have that same vision where I live, where there's not nearly that much growing going on. And this legislation will help to get us organized, lay a strong platform for doing it. My vision is to start in five points. Keep moving east. That's the Green Valley. Little by little, I like to point out that this is also a step toward raising food production in our mayors overall goal of of our city being able to feed itself with local foods. Then one other thing. The definition of a food desert is where residents have to travel miles to get to food. This would kind of create a tipping point where the shift would be going blocks to get food. And in closing, I would like to say that not only does this legislation encourage individual families to be a part of their own food solution, but it will also encourage more neighborhood connectedness around food, around sharing and around improved health . Thank you for listening. Thank you. And our last speaker to maker. And I apologize if I misspoke. I'm Sue Glass Maker. I'm here representing Curtis Park Neighbors. Curtis Park Neighbors was advised early on in this process by the cottage food people. They did an excellent job of helping us understand this. And also we knew about it from planning at I.N.S., so we're pretty well versed in it. Curtis Park neighbors voted unanimously to support this text amendment, and we feel that you just have to look at Vermont to see how this works. Vermont is the leader in the nation on this type of cottage industry stuff because the people there have to scrape for jobs. And what happens is people develop an entrepreneurial mindset and they start doing this. And it's amazing what happens when a little thing happens. And it's an easy way for people to not only feed themselves good food, but it's an easy way for them to start a business with with low risk and low startup cost so they can take a little whirl at it in a very small way. And it's amazing what can come out of that. And it's mostly that independent spirit that gets fostered. So, again, we were unanimously in favor of this. Thank you. Thank you. That concludes our speakers. Are there any questions from members of council? Seen on the public hearing for 398 is close and now it's time for comments from members of council. Councilwoman Cannick. I will yield to my colleagues. Mr. Chair, thank you for the opportunity. I'll ring in at the end here. Certainly, Councilwoman Lehman. Thank you. Councilwoman Sheppard could not be here this evening and asked that I read her letter for you. So I'm going to read the letter from Councilwoman Shepherd. I am very sorry not to be able to be here for tonight's historic vote, as I am on vacation with my family. That was planned long ago. I am definitely with you in spirit. However, as I'm very proud of all the. Work the local food. Community and my colleagues, council member Albert Brooks and especially Councilwoman Robin Kennish, have done to move this ordinance forward. As many of you may know. I actually did. Backyard vegetable. Farming on my own. Just prior to being elected to council in 2011. This was during two and a half year period where I was home taking care. Of my son and it provided me with a little income and something to keep me and my. Mind busy engaged when I wasn't changing diapers or feeding the baby. I did it on a very small. Scale basis and my profit margins were extremely slim, especially since the only way to easily distribute my produce was to drop it off at my customers home and my vehicle, further eating into any profits that I made due to money I spent on gaffs. I often and fantasized about how nice it would be to be able to sell vegetables from my own home and also some minimally processed products such as jam. Recently I taught Revision International, a nonprofit organization that teaches people how to grow food for themselves and their neighbors in Council District three. I had the opportunity to meet a wonderful family of seven who lived in a very small one bedroom house with the help and direction from Rent Revision International and access to a little bit of land. This family is growing all their own food, sharing quite a bit with their neighbors, and selling the extra to help supplement their very modest income. Their gardens are beautiful national my showcases in a food desert and have attracted the attention of many. Including. Media outlets such as encryption. These are a couple of examples of the type of people and enterprise this ordinance can help. And I precisely the reason I am proud to co-sponsor this ordinance, this my carefully crafted bill can. Increase. Access to healthy foods in areas where none exist, contributing to a healthier parents and children in areas where it may take years to recruit a major grocery store. This ordinance also gives opportunity to many people who are prolific gardeners or talented home food producers to sell a little bit of their bounty and help bring some much needed income to supplement their incomes. It also gives communities the chance to learn more about where their food comes from and helps children and adults reconnect meaningfully with the land in a way that has been lost in our hectic culture. It gives the opportunity for more of our dollars to continue circulating locally and boosting our economy rather than draining away to out of state or out of country. Agribusiness producers, whom we had never met and may not share our values on what it means to grow food. In a. Sustainable manner. Once again, I applaud all the hard work that has transpired to bring this ordinance forward, and I strongly urge my colleagues to vote yes. Thank you. Thank you. Councilwoman Lemon. Councilman Brooks. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I for a ten minute joke. I'm sorry. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I never thought when I took office how how much of an issue, a social justice issue, the price and location of a vegetable would be and this is this has truly been a transformational process for me personally. I think any time I sponsor legislation, I want to have the kind of the three the three piece. Right. The personal transformation has some specific projects in the district that we're working on and and always thinking of some larger policy issues. And so for the projects we live in. Northeastern was one of the largest food deserts in the city. And as I was knocking on doors when I was running for office in 2011, a lot of folks commented on this and they talked about the length it was to walk to a grocery store in District eight, only had Safeway. And so 55,000 residents with one major grocery store. You know, it's ridiculous. So we worked really hard with a couple of developers and also with Sunflower, which then changed its name to to locate right there on Colfax. And thanks to the council and a lot of community support, we were able to to get to get that sunflower there. And it is one of the, you know, top revenue producing grocery stores in their whole network. So it was really exciting to see that, you know, we we've been working really hard to find out. Can we get another one in five points? Can we get another one in right now? And all over the northeast, northeast, Denver, in collaborating even with Globeville, Elyria, Swansea, where these nodes and these pockets of of grocery empty grocery stores are, you know, I, I was excited when Councilwoman Canete brought this forward and I want to thank her for her leadership in this. She's been wonderful to work with, very thorough and the community support that's behind it. I have neighbors, actually. Beverly Grant is my neighbor. So, you know, I had to get my stuff together. But I have neighbors who are so excited about this piece of legislation. And it's it's I think it is a tremendous microeconomic plan for neighbors to get involved, not only to become healthy by growing their own, but by being able to be a part of this local economy. Last last week, you know, we've been we've been planting our own little garden in the Brooks household. And my joy comes when my my kids, every day, they get home from school, they run straight to the garden and they're able to see, how's the zucchini doing? Okay. How's the tomatoes doing? Okay. The squash is looking pretty good. And so you see that we're instilling this in young people. And even in my family, we didn't we didn't have these kind of opportunities. And so that my kids are already starting at this young of age and they understand how to plant and they understand how to be a part of this healthy lifestyle is transformational. And that's why it's so important that we pass this piece of legislation. So I will I'll be supporting this. I think it's important when we when we tackle food deserts, that we have the macro in the micro envision, we've got to make sure that we have these grocery stores. But at the same time, we've got to make sure that there's a local grass root education going on throughout our community. And I think this policy is going to create that. So I hope that my colleagues will support this. And once again, thank you to Councilwoman Shepherd and Councilwoman Cohen each. Thank you, Councilman Brooks. Councilman Lopez. Thank you, Mr. President. I am absolutely supportive of this ordinance. I think this is frankly a no brainer for us. And I think that you'll find that, you know, a lot of folks are very supportive in this city, and a lot of folks would probably say, you mean we couldn't do that in the first place? Right. I mean, there's there's a lot of support. Hmm. Unfortunately, we still have food deserts and having Eric and folks at revision and the bottom up thought out in Westwood working to stand in the gap. Basically when it comes to food deserts, they do it passionately. They do it despite the rising cost of water. Although in these chambers we vote to create this ordinance to support this, there are other quasi governmental chambers that still give give us grief about a reduced rate in water so that folks can actually grow. I'm talking about Denver water. We need to be able to partner and we need to be able to do this, not just the city and county of Denver, but in all of our agencies to support this and to support this effort, because that's the gap. The gap is that in very many neighborhoods, for decades, they've had. No grocery store. And if they do, it's potato chips and Pepsi. And it's not something that is healthy and not something that promotes a healthy lifestyle or combats disease and obesity. In some zip codes in Denver, you have folks who suffer from such high rates of diabetes and heart disease and obesity that they live 12 years less than other zip codes and people in other zip codes. That's how bad this crisis is. And if we are witnessing a health crisis now, imagine what it will be like ten, 20, 30 years down the line when those same communities do not have access to fresh produce. So this is absolutely standing in the gap and allowing folks to build that local economy because jobs are still hard to come by. But I don't want this passes tonight, which I expect it to and expect to see. A lot of the proponents in this chain, in these chambers continue to do the hard work that they're doing. I don't want this to be an excuse as to not put a grocery store in a neighborhood and not fill those gaps in this city where people do not have access to healthy food. We have the power and we have the resources in this city combined to do that. The entities constructed and assembled and boardrooms ready to do that. It just takes the will. My son has guns, as we say, in Westwood and in West Denver. The desire to do it. Until then, I apply to you all for taking this commonsense idea, turning it into legislation. I applaud sponsors for doing this and making sure that in the meantime, great folks like you are standing in the gap and there's great progress and there's an amazing sense of community that is born out of this. So I absolutely support this, and it's something that's long overdue. It is something that is absolutely ancient in its ways and ancient in its wisdom. Thank you, madam. Thank you, Mr. President. I didn't mean that like Brooks did. I meant that. I'm sorry. Thank you, counsel. Mr. President. Mr. President. Councilwoman Fox. Thank you, Mr. President. I've heard how enthusiastic some of our citizens are about this proposal, both from tonight and the time before. And they've convinced me that it may be a worthwhile project for some areas of town. Unfortunately, this proposal applies to almost all zoning districts. And I do think, Councilwoman CORNISH, for exempting several small areas in my district that historically have had very restrictive zoning. Now, not the areas in my district are in a food desert. So that's different from the testimony that many of you have given. We do not have that issue, and that's not something we're solving for by considering this ordinance. My three most active associations chose to take a formal vote on this proposal. And all three of those will be included in the sales. So they are included under this ordinance. One neighborhood split. Two unanimously opposed. Ironically, the night that the two that unanimously opposed these ordinances, the night that they took the vote, they had a guest speaker. And it was a master gardener, a professional gardener who had supplies that he had brought. And he was trying to have people even have some freebies to take home. So there was a good crowd and they were all ones who wanted to garden. They really did find a number of problems, however, and chose that they didn't want to support it. They did, however, say that they wished that the ordinance was trying to promote more farmers markets on arterials that they would have supported. They did. I would say that the most common complaint I get from constituents when I send out my survey is they write back saying, please don't let my neighborhood go downhill. Traffic and commercialization. Are two of the things they're concerned about now. I would say their biggest concern about this ordinance is that it dramatically increases commercialization in residential areas and it's visible. I mean, not like somebody cutting hair behind your closed door. You don't do that out on the front lawn. Here, you're going to be doing it out on the front lawn. There's going be a stamp set up, could be from 8 a.m. to dusk every day of the year according to this ordinance. That is something that they are extremely concerned about. Likewise, we have such a large yards and the potential of growing so much vegetable that there would be a possibility that traffic could increase because people would be drawn to these areas. And that is something that concerns them. I'd certainly be tempted to support this if it started with, say, areas of change and allowed stable neighborhoods that wanted. To to opt. In. If we were to start smaller and see how this goes in areas that really do have the need. That would be something I'd be tempted to support. But that's not how this ordinance is written. And given the feedback I have gotten in my areas, I will not be supporting it. Thank you, Councilman Fox. Councilman Nevett. Thank you, Mr. President. Oh, excuse me. So I want to express my support for this. But I also want to do two other things. One is to make a whiny little complaint, and then I'll follow that up with something that might maybe a civics lesson that I've learned from the whining complaint. So starting with the expression of support, this move makes perfect sense. In a perfect sense, it's it's the obvious next step in a trajectory that we began some time ago, a trajectory towards a more inclusive, a more local, a more diverse, a more sustainable food system. And each step on this trajectory, each step that we've taken has been preceded by a great deal of anxiety and nervousness and controversy. And each step that we've taken has been followed by almost complete silence and no problems whatsoever. This started with Councilwoman Lemon. She was the one who kicked this off down this road by moving to legalize the keeping of bees inside the city and county of Denver. So you can imagine the controversy associated with potential of your neighbor keeping bees. But she persevered. We legalized the keeping of bees. And as far as I know, there have been virtually no complaints of the keeping of bees. Great. So people who want to keep bees can keep bees. Some people are better off. Nobody's worse off. I followed that up by legalizing the keeping of chickens. Again, a great deal of anxiety controversy. Your neighbors are going to keep chickens and all hell is going to break loose. But we persevered and we passed the legalization of the keeping of chickens. And we have had virtually no complaints over the keeping of chickens. So once again, people have more diverse food sources. They get to enjoy what they are doing. They have new freedoms and some people are better off and no people are worse off. So this is clearly the the next step. We're a diverse city with diverse interests and diverse enthusiasms. If you want to do something, even if I don't particularly like it, and you can do it without causing problems for your neighbor. Who are we to say no? So now let me get to my whiny little complaint. Inside this bill is the provision that the sale of cottage foods cannot begin until 8:00 in the morning. But in the rest of our code, you can begin almost anything at 7:00 in the morning, so I can start hammering shingles on my roof at 7 a.m., I can start running a table saw in my backyard at 7 a.m.. I can start jackhammering up my sidewalk at 7 a.m., but I have to wait until 8 a.m. to go next door and buy a basket of tomatoes from my neighbor because otherwise it would be too disruptive. So down the road this perversity will be ridiculed and the people ridiculing her will wonder what kind of morons were on city council who thought that buying vegetables was more disruptive than jackhammering your sidewalk? And you know, our code is rife with this. Everyone can point to pieces of our governance that are obviously ridiculous and that, you know, the who were the idiots on city council who approved this. But this is actually a great opportunity to offer maybe just a little bit of a civics lesson. This kind of outcome isn't the product of morons because there's 13 brilliant people on the city council. This is one of the dis tempers of democracy. This is what happens actually, when democracy works. Councilwoman Kennish has done exactly the right thing. She had a good idea. She saw input from all corners of the city. That input was diverse. Some people were supportive. Some people were opposed. People had concerns. And she tried to address those concerns. And one of the ways as a good representative, Democratic representative, addressing some of those concerns involved, allaying some of the fears of some people in some neighborhoods by moving the start time from 7 a.m. to 8 a.m.. And I noticed tonight this was not without controversy, but tonight everyone is testifying in favor. So those who are opposed appear to be somewhat mollified and they're not here. Councilwoman Kennish did exactly the right thing, and this ordinance is the product of that democratic process. But that democratic process is not always internally coherent. It's not always absolutely consistent in the way it would be if we simply wrote the rules with a single point of view and a single point of time with a single perspective. So down the road, when you find something that the city is doing that you think is moronic or crazy or perverse or incomprehensible, just think back to this. And remember, sometimes when democracy works, you get outcomes that aren't necessarily coherent, but they're democratic nonetheless. And I look forward to getting this passed and letting people sell food to their neighbors, as they should have been all along. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman Nemec, Councilwoman Ortega. Thank you, Mr. President. First of all, I want to thank Councilwoman Kenny for her efforts. I know that she's been working on this for some time and has done very extensive outreach to our RINO's and other organizations that care very much about this issue. I was part of a group that went to New Mexico a couple of months ago looking at and talking about food sustainability issues, and we came back with some very important lessons learned and suggestions. And we're actually following up with two meetings next week with a number of our key city players to talk about some of those lessons learned, including the fact that if you have not looked at the food section in the mayor's climate action plan, there's not very much in there about food. And so we've got some strong suggestions that we're going to be talking with some of the Cabinet members about that we'd like to see incorporated into the Climate Action Plan , because that's a document that looks, you know, years into the future. And you've got to take into account the new opportunities that are available. And when you look at what cities are doing all across the country and we had a chance to learn from other cities in the southwest, this was a tremendous opportunity where they're trying to address many of the same topics that we talked about here tonight of providing food for people that are in food deserts, creating the opportunities for people to grow food in their home, and they can make a little bit of money from that. We have organizations in Denver like Denver Urban Gardens, who has been around for, I want to say, almost 30 years. Is that. Correct. Whereby we have specific fixed site locations in the city of Denver that are serving people in those neighborhoods. Many of them when they started, were very low income communities. But many of those original gardeners, even though many of them may have left that neighborhood, still garden in those in those locations and are providing food for their families. I think the opportunity to be able to allow folks to sell what they are growing to their neighbors, to folks that are in need. I think you're going to see some traffic reduction because you're going to see neighbors walking to neighbors homes. You're not going to see people getting in cars and driving to the grocery store because they're going to enjoy having access to fresh fruit and vegetables. And so I think that's a good thing. I think this is a big step forward for the city. I'm excited about the opportunities that it's going to create. I've been gardening for a number of years. As a matter of fact, Councilman Brown, who's not here tonight, has historically shared tomatoes with many of us. I'm growing some yellow tomatoes from a plant that he gave, and I'm just waiting for them to get ripe so I can try to see how they compare to the red tomatoes. I'm not planning to sell anything out of my garden because I usually just give stuff away when I have any excess. But I think this is a big step in the right direction for the city of Denver, and I'm very happy to support it. Thank you. Thank you again, Councilwoman Monteiro. Thank you, Mr. President. I also wanted to thank Councilman Kennish and Councilman Brooks and Councilwoman Sheperd for bringing this creative and most needed amendment forward several years ago. I was able to sponsor a text amendment that would allow for aquaponics in this in the Swansea neighborhood. And at the time it was something that wasn't really being done. But the whole idea behind aquaponics in this old and this old greenhouse was to allow for fish to float in a tank and swim around and then be able to use the fertilized water to grow lettuce and other vegetables in this particular greenhouse. And that's when I began to learn so much about the merits of the food justice system and movement and the empowerment that people feel when they grow their own food. The awesome, amazing power that people feel when they when they can do that. And then that was followed by the bees and the chickens and the goats. And and now today, we're talking about being able to just put a basket out in front of your yard and be able to sell. So I am really, really excited about that. The idea that the city of Denver actually recognizes the food justice movement is so amazing and incredible to me that something so simple as being able to grow your own food in your garden can actually help you with your and your family and being able to bring everybody together, your community, but even the basic economics of growing your own vegetables. I'll just give you a real quick example. The other day, we were in the mood for color visitors, which is, you know, squash and onions and jalapenos and garlic. And we went to the farmer's market because we didn't want to go to a to a grocery store. And I took tabs on how much I paid for everything. You know, each squash was like a dollar 50 each could eat. You know, each dollar piano was, you know, like two for a dollar 50 and the onion and the garlic. And I thought, Oh, if I had a garden in the back, I could have just gone and, you know, picked my own little garden. So it wasn't a lot of money, but, you know, it kind of adds up. And I thought I could, you know, I could do this. Now I want to say that I have just one little tomato and his name is Tiny Tim and he's sitting in the kitchen. And I'm trying to do my best to have him thrive. And maybe someday he'll, you know, maybe someday I'll have tomatoes. But what I'm trying to say is that if you're talking to somebody that doesn't really know how to grow a garden, but here's what I'm willing to do. You know, I'm willing to learn about composting. You know, I'm willing to pull weeds and. Willing to try my garden. And I think, you know, the idea of just being able to have that possibility. And I would be so excited if I was able to grow something and somebody would buy it from me, you know? You know, the squash or the garlic. I would just be so happy with myself to be able to do that. So I, you know, I come to it with the idea of actually being joyful about growing and having fun doing that. So I support this. Many of my constituents have weighed in and, you know, they're excited about it, too, because we live in an amazing city that's always pushing the envelope and trying to do new things. So I will be supporting this and congratulations to all the sponsors. Thank you, Councilwoman Monteiro. Councilman Rob. Thank you, Mr. President. All right. Just a couple of word choice or semantic differences with my colleagues, but general support of this bill. Councilman Lopez said that this is a no brainer. And I think you said for us. I think that's definitely true in some neighborhoods. That this is. Pretty universally wanted. But in my neighborhood, I didn't find. It a slam dunk in my district. To talk to the neighborhoods. I probably have 15 neighborhood organizations at least. I put this in my newsletter three times, about three months in a row. Asking for feedback. Referencing all the links. Of course we know how much people read email, so maybe not everybody read it. But of all of that, in Councilwoman Connection's outreach, only two neighborhood groups discussed the ordinance enough to then contact me. One couldn't agree to support it, but they also couldn't. Agree to oppose it. And so I sort of had this letter. Or communication of. We discussed. It and we don't know it. It wasn't a no brainer for them. They had some real. Concerns and they had some real desires. One neighborhood did oppose it, which has given me a lot of pause and probably for some of the reasons that Councilwoman Frances neighborhood opposed it. The commercialization of a neighborhood which I understood, but I but both Councilwoman and I took some time to talk to those neighborhood leaders. And then while I get thousands of emails on all sorts of topics, I don't think I had more than five. Personal emails. On this topic from Council District ten, and probably this just shows how different all our districts really are. We don't have large lots in my district. It's probably not a huge income burner for. Folks in my district. And that's a second sort of word choice disagreement I have. I don't know if this is a huge step for Denver. I actually think it's sort of a small step. One of the neighborhood leaders, zoning chair in Cherry Creek North and I were chatting and I said, I don't think this is going to happen much in our district, sort of like the corner lemonade stand. And he laughed and he said, Yeah, we'll probably have a celery stand on the corner. Some kid will be out selling celery. And there. Wasn't that that. Great a concern. We're not talking, although it's important to grow your own produce. It's a good hobby, can be healthy, can be a lot of work. But we're not talking about a get rich fast scheme here in growing produce and selling it. Councilwoman Sheppard's letter referenced how little she actually made. Still, I think it's good for the neighborhoods where they want to do it and not harmful for the neighborhoods where there's not as much interest. So I am going to go ahead and support this. Thank you, Councilwoman Robb. Councilwoman, can each. Thank you, Mr. President, and thank you to all of my colleagues for the thoughtful comments. This job. I love this job. Did I say that once tonight? Already it's really a privilege. And you can choose to make an impact in a lot of different ways from the Council. We have a rule in our office which is that we only ever take something on if we have a partner. We're small, we only have myself and two staff who are outstanding, but we want things to live past my term in office. We want things to live past what three people can do. And so every now and then you get lucky and in walks the door, an amazing set of partners, and they have an idea. And so in this case, it was the Sustainable Food Policy Council, which is a group of appointees of the mayor and also a collaborative known as the Live Well Regional Community Collaborative, few other revision and other organizations. But thank you to those. Partners, some of whom spoke today. But also thank you to the other residents who spoke. We had Curtis Park here and in the prior hearing we had other residents. We really did have what I call true democracy, which is people came up with an idea and they researched it and then they brought it to our office. So so I didn't do very much work on this one. And really the work was done by those partners and my staff. So Dana miller, Shayna Spurlock, our planning person, Sarah Showalter, and also my staff even, that's on it. I also want to thank Mayor Hancock because I appreciate his evaluation of this ordinance compared to the priorities that he has for the city in which today was our state of the city, where he talked about these things. He talked about food that doesn't travel so far and food that's accessible. And so I thank him for his support of this ordinance, which he shared with all of our colleagues last week to those who've had a few concerns about neighborhood quality of life. We did research the other cities that have done this. Wheat Ridge has had this in place for some time. Not one complaint related to quality of life. The city of Seattle, almost identical in size 600, some thousand residents, very similar, you know, size of the city, neighborhoods that are somewhat dense with some neighborhoods that are somewhat more suburban or bigger, bigger yards. No complaints related to quality of life. Parking just has not been an issue, and we have no evidence that it would become an issue. There is an interest the city has in uniformity of zoned districts, and I want to share that. Although I'm passionate and part of the reason I was excited to bring this ordinance up in terms of food deserts in low income neighborhoods, I am at large and I took this on with the intentional desire that it was really something that should be available to all neighborhoods, that which may be small for the city, could be very large for an individual. And so when I heard from a retired woman in a very middle class, stable neighborhood with access to three grocery stores that she felt pretty excited about making her jam available and that this was something in her retirement that would give her joy. That's an opportunity. And so I don't think that this only is about some neighborhoods in the city. I do think it's a different opportunity in different neighborhoods, but equally valid and equally important. And so I do want to thank Sue Ackerson from from Curtis Park about the economics in my own house, the entrepreneurial spirit as is taking wind. And I recently had, you know, access to regular and my five year old son informed me that we were no longer allowed to give it to the neighbor because we were supposed to be selling it. So, so clearly. Clearly, that entrepreneurial spirit starts early and takes off with a vengeance. Nothing in this ordinance prohibits the free distribution of vegetables. And I'll just please note. And so I'm excited that it's not often you can with one swoop, one person can earn a little cash and one person can get some fresh food. And you don't have to leave the neighborhood. And that's what this does. And I believe we will have a review at one year point. I'm sure at that point we're going to find that there were very few problems, but we will follow up on any that arise. And I appreciate the city for engaging in the dialog. People learned a lot through this process about why it's safer to buy your vegetable from your neighbor than it is from a farm. Produce in a country that uses pesticides that are banned here, or from a farm that uses machinery, equipment, even if it's on the western slope that's subject to bacteria in ways that handheld vegetables are not. And so people learned a lot about food safety and about all of the pieces of this. So so this was a conversation not just here at the dais, but across the city. And so I think everyone who is engaged in it and who communicated, regardless of their concerns or their side on the issue. And with that, I thank my colleagues and urged them to vote yes and respect those who will dissent, but appreciate their engagement as well. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilwoman Canete. See no other comments from members of the Council. Madam Secretary, roll call. Can each I Liman by Lucas Montero. Nevitt Ortega, Rob Fry, Brooks. I. But no. Mr. President. Hi. Councilwoman Lehman. Thank you, Madam Secretary. Please go to the end and have the results. 9199918 Council Bill 398 has passed. We are moving on to our second public hearing council bill. 502 Councilwoman Kenneth, would you please put council bill 502 on the floor? Yes, Mr. President. I move that council bill five oh to be placed upon final consideration and do pass.

A resolution approving a proposed First Amendatory Agreement between the City and County of Denver and Brothers Redevelopment, Inc. to revise the scope of services and budget, increase the maximum contract amount, and extend the term for the administration of the Temporary Rental and Utility Assistance (TRUA) Program. Amends a contract with Brothers Redevelopment, Inc. by adding $1,262,255 for a new total of $2,795,855 and one year for a new end date of 12-31-22 for administration of the Temporary Rental and Utility Assistance (TRUA) program (HOST 202161105-01). The last regularly scheduled Council meeting within the 30-day review period is on 1-3-22. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 12-1-21. Pursuant to Council Rule 3.7, Councilmember Hinds called this item out at the 12-13-21 meeting for a one-week postponement to 12-20-21.

DenverCityCouncil_12132021_21-1438

Thank you. Council Resolution 144, four. We'll be back before Council for consideration on Monday, December 20th. Madam Secretary, please put the next item on our screen. Councilmember Hines, go ahead with your comments on Resolution 1438. Thank you. Council President Pursuant to Council Rule 3.7, I'm calling out this resolution to postpone consideration until Monday, December 20th. No motion is required. Do any members of council have comments? CNN. Councilmember Hines. Council Resolution 1438 will be back before Council for consideration on Monday, December 20th. Okay, that concludes the items to be called out. All bills for introduction are ordered published. Council members remember this is a consent or block vote. You will need to vote ie. Otherwise this is your last chance to call it an item for a separate vote. Councilmember Hines, will you please put the resolutions for adoption and the bills on final consideration for final passage on the floor? Thank you. Council President. One moment. All right. I'm going to hope that the council secretary will check my work. I'd like to make a move. The resolutions be adopted in bills on final consideration, be placed upon final consideration, and do passing a block for the following items. 20 1-1523. 20 1-141 121. Dash 1433. 20 1-14, four, five. 20 1-1460 21. Dash 1461. 20 1-1462. 20 1-1463. 20 1-1464. 20 1-1330. 20 1-1414. 20 1-1415. 20 1-142 821. Dash 1430. 20 1-144 220 1-144 620 1-144 721. Dash 1453. 20 1-145 420 1-145 820 1-145 920 1-146 520 1-146 620 1-142 220 1-144 120 1-132 620 1-132 720 1-132 820 1-132 920 1-143 920 1-1440 20 1-140 520 1-140 820 1-141 221. Dash 142 421. Dash 142 521. Dash 1417. 20 1-1, four, two, three. Thank you. It has been moved and seconded. Madam Secretary, roll call. Black. I see tobacco. I Clark. All right. Fine. I. Herndon. I. All right. Hi. Cashman. Kenny Ortega. I. I swear, i. Madam President, I. Madam Secretary closed the voting and announced the results. 12 US 12 eyes. The resolutions have been adopted and the bills have been placed upon final consideration and do pass. Tonight there'll be a required public hearing on Council Bill 21, Dash 1365 designating the East Seventh Avenue Historic District Steel Street Extension as a district for preservation and a required public hearing on Council Bill 20 1-1429 Designating Concretion Hall at 3001 South Federal Boulevard as a structure for preservation.

Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by adding Chapter 10.82 relating to prohibiting spectators at street races, sideshows, and reckless driving exhibitions, read and adopted as read. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_03012022_22-0228

Thank you. Let's do the final audience of the night, which is audience 16. And then we'll go back to the I did a comment, general public comment and the rest of the agenda. Madam Kirk, can you read item 16? Report from City Attorney Recommendation to declare ordinance relating to prohibiting spectators at street races, sideshows and reckless driving exhibitions. Read the first time and later the next regular meeting of City Council for Final Reading Citywide. Let me turn this over to Councilman Super now. Okay. Thank you, Mayor Garcia. I move that we accept the recommendation and declare an ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code. My motion also requests that we adopt the proposed seven page ordinance exactly as written without amendments. The City Attorney's Office has created an ordinance that aligns precisely with City Council's directive and unanimous vote on July 20th, 2021. It is modeled after the ordinances of San Jose and Anaheim. And both those municipalities were referenced in my council presentation on July 20th. Further, our city attorney's office sought and received input from both the city prosecutor's office and the Long Beach Police Department. That input included vetting, fine tuning and final signoff. That action is perfectly aligned with our goal to provide law enforcement with the necessary tools. For these reasons I'm asking we approved the ordinance as proposed. I'd also like to thank our city attorney, city prosecutor and LBP for their collaborative and comprehensive work. Last, I'd like to remind everyone of our goal that the ordinance should act as a deterrent. With other ordinances existing in our region. Our city should never be a target due to inadequate or non existing laws. This ordinance has put us on a path to achieving that goal. I respectfully ask for your support. Thank you. Mr. Mayor, that is an emotional thank you. As acknowledged, I think Mr. Mayor is gone. I don't have the view. I think he has a commitment at 6:00. And so if you have your sacking, we'll just raise your hand and I'll know speaking. Okay? Okay. Councilwoman Price. I support the motion and I thank Councilwoman Sabrina for bringing it forth. Okay, I'll add a council comment. And if you have council comments, just raise your hand. First of all, thank you, Councilman Supernormal, for trying to take on this issue. I think people want to see a resolution to the street takeovers and we have a lot of them in North Hollywood, I would say. I did raise this raises concern that I had some good conversation. The city prosecutor raised the concern about the youth who are spectators. And we talked about it last time. And I want to bring it up again that as we implement this this this ordinance, I'm going to support this. And I would I want to make sure that what we've learned is people under 26, they they respond to positive intervention. We have data on this. We've created the program, the past program to specifically talk about work with this audience. I don't believe that attending a street takeover should leave a black mark that ultimately can keep them from getting a job or connected to the things that we're supposed to be doing or getting an apartment or get into purchasing a home. So I think that we need to lean in and make sure we use the programs that we have. If somebody breaks the law, I think there needs to be a penalty. However, we need to make sure that we're being developmentally sensitive, particularly with young people. So I want to is the prosecutor here today and I have a question for him. Good evening. Members of the city council, this is Doug Halbert, Long Beach City here. Thank you. Hey, Doug, I will I want to just request that you tell us how we can engage, particularly with young people on this, you know, path was originally we talked about, you know, 24, 26 was the point when brains are fully developed and we have a lot of resources in the city, educational, you know, other things. And so the way, you know, path is work is not largely pretrial. So you get your ticket, then you get a letter from prosecutor says, look, you can stand in front of a judge and pay a fine or you can come in and connect and get on the right track or whatever it is. How would you engage path with this ordinance? It would be my first question. Well, first of all, I support the ordinance. I think it's a good idea and definitely needed in the city of Long Beach. Most of our path diversion and most of our diversion programs in general are pre filing diversion. So they don't actually go to court and they get a letter that they're offered to participate in a diversion program. If they take us up on that offer and they complete the diversion program, then they do not have to go to court or pay a fine or suffer any of the criminal consequences. So the PATH Program is a jobs based diversion program for mostly 18 to 24 year olds. And that's because that matches the grant that's available to Pacific Gateway, and it helps connect them to jobs or employment or some type of job skills to make them more employable. That's what the PATH program does. We have other programs as well. But since you mentioned the PATH program, that that one is geared towards young adults under the age of 24 and younger who have cases in my office. Fantastic. I think that's great. You know, I support the discretion that you have as a prosecutor to determine, you know, the best course of action. But what I like that we you know, we don't just have sticks, we have carrot. You can issue citations and we can do the things that need to happen. However, we you know, we're a local community, so we can handle our local youth a certain way. I think that's good. I think I think that satisfies my question. I'm happy to support the ordinance and comfort it, knowing that our prosecutors are going to get it passed. And I think, you know, I would encourage you to, you know, like. If people get questions because we got a lot of questions about what happened since these take over. Are largely young people out there. I think we should talk about we have more than one tool in the tool shed. I think that's important for us to know in how we are sensitive and how we deal with young people. That those are my comments. Any other comments he has raised? Okay. I see Councilman Ciro. I want to thank Councilmember Sabrina for bringing it forward. I mean, I do, you know. Agree that it can be dangerous and that we do need to figure out how to address it. But at the same time, I think when it initially came up, I did have concerns with what it means for young people, especially not just young people of color, but who are also immigrant and even maybe undocumented. I don't I certainly wouldn't want them being at an event and then getting caught and being not just only going through proceedings, but also being deported as well. And so I do want to make sure we do look into programs that can provide alternative ways and where they can learn their lesson, but also not have it be a mark against them as they move forward into whether it's higher education or jobs or other opportunities. So so those are some just having worked with young people of color and nonprofit and pretty. And it's particularly important for me that we we don't criminalize them for the, you know, for the things that they do as young people. Thank you. And ask anyone else. I see two hands. Counsel Now for your first. Your immediate counsel. Sorry about that. You think after all this time I would get that. So. Thank you, Vice Mayor. And I also wanted to thank council member Super Scott for bringing us this item last summer. And the city attorney for drafting the ordinance. I do agree with you, Vice Mayor, that I think that we could utilize a path that would be that would be great. I do think that these street races and fight shows are dangerous and harmful. They interfere with traffic. They disrupt businesses. And and I think it's important that the city that we do everything that we can do to stop these events that are happening all across the city. I think in all of our districts, this is happening. I know I've seen the races down here along the the ocean corridors over the pike and Rainbow Harbor, and these are just happening on a regular basis. So I'm glad that that council members, if we're not took took a lead on this. I do also believe that these penalties are necessary to deter these events from happening. And in focusing on areas is a good start because they are a big part of the issue. But we also need to focus on the drivers of these events and these events would never even happen without the driver. So I think also exploring solutions to focus on those individuals is good too. I also believe that if a spectator is founded violation of this policy, that we have to make sure the extent of their involvement. I know there was a one of these takeovers over at the town center and my cousin had called me, you know , he was over there and he's like, I saw that. And so I just, you know, we just, you know, I hope and trust that the Long Beach Police Department will make sure that we do understand the assault, that that the extent of this involvement of folks and that just not bystanders are or people that are happened to be in the area. So I trust that that that that that that will have that that will happen. And so thank you very much. And I will be supporting this item today. Fantastic. Thank you. Can make complements and data. Thank you very much, Mayor. Thank you, councilmembers, for leading on this very important item. I'm very supportive of this item. I know that our young people sometimes feel that they are invincible. And so they they really feel that it's not dangerous. But when you're really creating a circle of people and then you have cars that are showing off, it just really terrifies me. And, you know, it's just a matter of time before something really bad happens. And, you know, I would not want to see that here in our in our city. So I really applaud Councilmember Super now for bringing this item forward. I also do agree that we have to make sure that we do let everyone know who participates, that this is not allowed in Long Beach. But at the same time, like other colleagues of mine have said, we do have to. Kind of be sensitive to some of the people that might be doing this. But also we have to send a firm message that this is not allowed. We're not going to allow people to come in and put innocent lives at danger. And so with that, I will absolutely be supporting this item. And tastic. Thank you. Any public comment on the item? If any members of the public wish to speak on this item, please use the raise hand feature or press star nine if dialing in by phone. Seen none. That concludes public comment. Fantastic. Thank you, Councilman Supernova. This great item will go ahead with our roll call vote. District one, district two. I. District three. I. District four. I. District five. District six. I. District seven. I. District eight. I. District nine. I. Motion is carried. All right. Thank you. I want to just check in with the clerk on what items we have next to do. Items 13, 14, 15 and 20. Okay. And public comment. So that's what I'm going to ask. Let's do public comment now and then we'll do the rest of the items in in that order.

A resolution approving a proposed Contract between the City and County of Denver and Sema Construction, Inc. for the design and construction of the 39th Avenue Greenway and Park Hill Detention project. Approves a $78,214,454 three-year contract with Sema Construction, Inc. for the design and construction of the 39th Avenue Greenway and Park Hill Detention project to protect against flooding while improving water quality, multi-modal mobility access opportunities, and creating and enhancing park and public spaces in Council Districts 8 and 9 (201738462). The last regularly scheduled Council meeting within the 30-day review period is on 1-8-18. The Committee approved filing this resolution by consent on 12-5-17. Pursuant to Council Rule 3.7, Councilman Espinoza called out this resolution at the Monday, December 18, 2017 Council meeting for a postponement to Tuesday, January 2, 2018.

DenverCityCouncil_01022018_17-1395

Seven ice, four days, 1396 has passed. All right, Councilwoman, can you please put 1395 on the floor? Yes, Mr. President, I move that council resolution 1395 be adopted. All right. It has been moved and second it. All right. Questions for 1395. And I'll go first on this and we'll need the whole team working on 1395 to the to the dies here. So there's a lot of discrepancy on the number of bores. Well, let me just start back. When did the EPA come through? Coal Clayton Global area Swansea and do soil samples. What year was that. Was that 2013. Do. So I'm Andrew Ross with Denver Department of Environment, Public Health and Environment. Yeah. So EPA came through and did the soil testing of residential soils between about 2000 and 2007, sort of a staggered approach. But they did it again in 2012 and 13. Correct. And they did do some follow up sampling in 2012. 2013, correct. Okay. And what was that for? That was just confirmation sampling of properties that hadn't been remediated. Okay. My understanding and for those properties that were refused, what what was the what did the EPA do? Oh, I don't have the numbers in front of me. How many people refused? But EPA went through their Superfund process recently. They called it a finding of significant differences, is the terminology. And they've decided that those properties will just not be cleaned up because those homeowners have refused to clean up. Okay. We'll leave it in the neighborhood of 10 to 12 residences. Okay. So it's gone down quite a bit. So we had a number of residents talk about the testing. Talk about the soil. And I wanted to hone in on the three borings along the 39th Avenue Channel that Kim Morse, Jennifer Eder kind of talked about. But I know that there's been a discrepancy from the administration. So can you talk about the number of borings that you have tested along the 39th Avenue Channel? Sure. So keep in mind, we can only test properties that we have legal access to. So starting in 2016, we took 33 samples along the entire project through city owned right away. And we followed that up last summer. Same right away with 38 more samples. So we've taken 71 total in city owned right away properties. In terms of the private parcels that the city is now acquiring. We're doing environmental due diligence sampling on all those properties. The city didn't start acquiring those properties until November. Mm hmm. And so we've been working through those properties as the city acquires them, and we haven't gotten any of that data back yet. Of the 71 samples. Can you tell us your analysis of those 71 samples which were hot, which, you know, did not meet the EPA standard? Sure. So we did find in terms of two lead, arsenic and then other things. So for lead, we did find a lead detection above the EPA action level at 39th and high. In one boring. And that was it for the for the entire project. Let me just correct you real quick. How many borings did you do along 39th Avenue? 39 from Franklin to High. The whole the whole thing is 71. Okay. Just wanted to make sure. Okay. So we did have to. I did hear you. Right. I just wanted to. Just for the record. Okay. So you found one. I need to correct myself. So out of the 71 samples, there was a lead detect above the EPA levels at 39th and high and one near still street behind the Coca-Cola building. The rest were all below the action, but just one. To 39th and high and behind the Coca-Cola bill. So, too. So. When you found this information, how quickly did you release it to the community? I don't know. I was with Citi at the time, so it's been up on our website since last summer. So it's been on our website for about a year. Okay. I can. Can. Can we get confirmation of that? I think. Sure. Didn't help Gin. Hillhouse was on the team. Gin. When these samples were taken, were they immediately released to the community? We're thinking, you know, Celia was really involved in. Okay. Is she not here? She's not. Here. Okay. So those were taken in the summer of 2016. And I believe that they were up on our website, the fall of 2016. Okay. Let's try to get it up as soon as we possibly can. Speaking to the mic with. Me, we try we work hard to get it up as soon as we can. And being transparent, we'll continue to do that and and report out to the community. We can. I can look back. There was an email there was an email that I received that was requesting that the sample soils be made public because they were not public. And now they are public. They are on our website. Okay. So they were never. There was always been transparency with those 71 samples. So, yes, I believe they've all been on our website for a long time now. Granted, it's not the easiest place to navigate to on our website. Okay. I've tried to share the link with folks that have asked me. Okay. I'll come back. We have several others in the queue. Councilman, New. York. Thank you, Mr. President. From the last comments we had about the soil contamination issues. I was waiting for the consultant reports and I finally received those reports this morning after I asked for them. And I can understand after reading and looking at it in the recommendations, I can understand some of the community concerns about what's going on here. And the thing that concerns me is something that Councilwoman Ortega started to talk about is the materials management plan. It's you know and if you look in the this in the first report, which is 2016, it just starts off by saying it is recommended that a space project specific materials management plan be developed for the entire project corridor. The MMP or the plan can be used to assist field operations is particularly construction. In preparing for the identification and management of impact of soil and allow for informed decisions with regard to re-use options of excavated soil that results from construction very clear as in the the report last year says the same thing about the May materials management plan. And I can't imagine why we wouldn't have that all of a sudden. All of a sudden, when I questioned about this plan, all of a sudden this draft sort of mysteriously was appearing today and saying it wouldn't be ready for three weeks now. Can you explain to me what's going on with this material management plan? Because I look at this is is almost like a hazardous waste plan. The city or a hospital that I'm familiar with would have and is much public concern there is about the the soil and what's going to happen with the soil. Why would we not have this material management plan in this ordinance tonight? So we try to get the materials management plan done prior to actual any dirt moving activities. And we try not to do it too far out in advance in case we find more information in the meantime. Excuse me. So we're on track with what we thought, where we'd be with the materials management plan. Purely coincidental that we got a draft from our contractor today and we'll have a final in about three weeks and we'll get it up on our website. Why is it not in the ordinance? I cannot find it. Mentioned a single word in the ordinance itself. I've looked through there and I don't see it anything at all. I don't see where SEMA is held responsible for this materials management plan at all. Why is it not in the ordinance? I'll defer to my attorney on that. But the materials management plan is a significant part of the contract with SEMA. It's not listed in the contract. I looked in the contract and it's not mentioned whatsoever. Yes. Good evening, Steve Coggins with the P2P team for the Materials Management Plan. There's actually two versions of that. There is one that is required per the contract. But given the unknowns associated with the environmental and to control the cost more properly, we made the decision to hold the materials management plans and the environmental risk is retained by the city. So the city is doing the material management plan to for whatever may be found as the construction is taking place during the project. Well, that's just not acceptable. How is it going to be held legally liable for the work it does with this soil? If if the materials major plant is not in their contract. It is in their contract. They do have. It in the contract we have in front of us tonight that we're actually being asked to approve the. Are the RFP, which is the the request for proposal has a deliverable in Section five of the environmental, which is the part of the contract. That's what we have here. It does not mention that whatsoever. I look through all those documents. It's not. It's in the RFP and it's a reference document to the contracts of the requirements of the contract are in the RFP, technical requirements of which the materials management plan is included in Section five. Environmental. Well, it's not in the contract with SEMA. It's part of the contract is a reference document. But is but. Is there is there. Yeah. Jessica Brody, Assistant City Attorney. So I think Steve's representation is accurate. Also, keep in mind that the materials management plan is is really focused on work practices that the contractor and its subcontractors are going to implement to comply with environmental laws and requirements, which are also part of the contract. The materials management plan, which is something we do on any soil disturbing project is is the how and you know the work practices to accomplish the compliance with environmental laws. But irrespective, the contractor still holds a compliance with all laws, including environmental laws. I understand what you're saying, but it's just not you know, the consulting report just says real clearly. We need to have that plan in place. And and, you know, and who's going to monitor the plan? Who when the construction goes along, who is is somebody being hired to monitor what's going to be happening with the soil and and the testing this required in their actual specific things being required in the consulting report. Excuse me. Yes. So we will have a materials management plan supervisor on site every day. That person will be hired by the city and county. And on top of that, we'll have city staff out there on a frequent basis. I plan to walk the site myself at least once a week. How often? When the soil be tested. So. There's two answers to that. So we'll both test the soil prior to the to the soil disturbing activities. That's what we're doing right now as we acquire the properties. If through that process, the soil is considered to be below EPA action levels, then we'll test the soil every 500 cubic yards of material that's removed. 500 cubic yards is about 20 dump trucks, roughly? Mm hmm. Okay. And then if something is found, who has the authority to stop construction? The materials management plans supervisor has the authority to stop. So that's in the plan that will will begin. Will council be getting a copy of this plan to review three weeks? We generally don't provide a copy for review because it's a sort of a standard document that we do on all sorts of projects. But well, I'd request that we do get a copy of this plan, appreciate it. And also think that this plan needs to be posted for the public to see. This is a very important document, so I think it needs to have some public comment. We'll get it posted to the website as soon as we have it finalized. And I don't I'm still uncomfortable with how can we proceed with this ordinance tonight without some kind of assurance that that management materials management plan is actually in place is going to be in place? I have seen nothing in the documents we have here that even mention this materials management plan. We're just going to take your word for it. Is this there? Right. Yes, sir. Councilman Nu. I mean, it's clearly in the in the requirements of the project. So it is a requirement of the contract that both SEMA creates, the materials management plan that they it's part of their contract. They have to produce that. It's a technical requirement of their contract. Again, the RFP is a reference documents and maybe review in the contract. It's a little bit layered in the back of the contract, if you will. And then also the city is doing a materials management plan as well for this particular project. So there'll be one that will be citywide materials management for these scopes of work, and they'll also be responsibilities of the contractor. And they do it is an approval document of the contract that the city has to approve the same materials management plan. What what hardship would it cause if we delayed this for two months until we got the materials management plan developed and written and approved and looked at and and then we pass on this SEMA contract. What typically the materials management plan is like a health and safety plan and it's a public information plan and it's a project management plan. All these plans and a design build type of delivery method are typically produced by the engineer of record design builder who is hired. So a lot of these plans are produced as part of the design phase of the contract. So that's that's where. I think we're going round and around. What car shape would it cause if we delay this contract tonight for two months until we got this plan written and. The main thing would be cost because we have a current price and contractual schedule from our SEMA design build team. So if we continue to delay the contract and so potential solutions could go up. Let me get our attorney in on this one, because I don't I don't think as we read it in, council secretary just said that if we delay, we'll be past the 30 day shot clock. Correct. Kirsten Crawford Legislative Council. You know what? Let me let me look. We can't until you pass the 30 days, Kelly. Missiles. Do you know if we. My understanding. Okay. Otherwise, it passes. But what is the 30 day date? The date is January 8th next week. Okay. Yeah. So we would be past the 30 day delay next week? Yeah. I think you're on the right line of questioning, though. And can I just can you provide the wording in the contract that you're talking about? Because we we can access it. And I think I think what Councilman New is saying is I'm voting on something tonight and I'm taking your word for it. But I don't have I don't have clarity in front of me. Yes, sir. We can't provide it. And it is in the again, in the RFP, which is a public document. So it is available and has been the RFP. So but we can absolutely provide it. You have a you have a signed document from CMA that they can apply to this plan. Well, the contract that they've signed, is there is there a compliance with it? Yes. Two copies of all. I'm sorry. Give us copies of that. Thank you. Councilman and I just had one more question before I jump to Councilman Flynn. I asked if you can come back. What's your name? I'm sorry. Andrew. Andrew. You're new, so I just. Sorry about that. I've been working with Celia Vandersloot, and she is. She is now a consultant. Okay, so quick question, the boring question again along 39th. So you mentioned 71 and but you also mentioned every five cubic feet. You will be doing testing. Sorry, every 500 cubic feet. This is when we're moving soil. So we're gonna bring soil. Got it tested as we go along. You know, some of the some of the fear, as I'm looking at the map here in coal, which I'm very familiar with, is that some of these, you know. Between Franklin. And. And see, man. I. Hi. Thank you. Between Franklin and High is where we have the most residential properties, where we've. We've not dug up this kind of soil near residential properties. So I'm really concerned about those. How many borings have we tested in those streets? So, again, we're we're still acquiring the properties. Yeah. And as of today. As of today, as of today, I think we've done about seven. But we're we're actually doing trenches because we've learned that we find we get better information out of a trench. So four of those seven, how many are contaminated? We don't have any of the data back yet. We did find building debris and quite a few of them. So when Janet Feder was talking about old houses on on Gilpin Street. That's correct. There was houses there at one point in time. The common construction technique back in the day when you removed a house was to collapse it into the basement or the crawl space. When you have. The contamination record back. Hopefully in the next couple of weeks. Okay. Labs are kind of slow right now with all the construction going on in Denver. Okay. Councilman Flynn. Thank you, Mr. President. I don't know who in the team might want to take these questions. Jason or Steve or Jen, have we potholed 39th Avenue? What have we found, Andrew? What have we found? Yes, those. Those 71 samples are right. And what do you know? But what have we found? Well, we found lead, arsenic and poly aromatic hydrocarbons. In what quantities? So arsenic is ubiquitous in the environment in Denver. So pretty much every sample has arsenic. None of them were above the EPA action level, except for one. I believe I'd have to check my notes. But the vast majority of them were below EPA action levels. Same with lead. We we found lead in a few places, but only had it above those action levels in a couple of places. And then the aromatic hydrocarbons, which was which is a byproduct of combustion. We found that throughout the the site, which is typical in Denver because people used to burn trash in their backyards. So we find that sort of everywhere we look. Do you would you find if you went to if you went to Eastman Avenue in southeast Denver and Councilwoman Black's district, just let me pick on her for a second. If you potholed Eastman Avenue, would you find arsenic? Most likely, yes. There's arsenic in native soils, uncontaminated soils. And. Okay, I've heard that before, Jen, maybe you're the best person to answer this, but if you're not, dish it off. What are just broadly speaking, what measures? What measures are in place in this contract and in our practices to ensure the safety of the neighborhoods? What steps will we follow to ensure the safety? I've heard about the eight foot fence. I've heard about dust control, etc.. Can you outline if there are any more? What do we. Need to do? There are several and steve as the contract admin would probably be best. For. Me out here, Steve. But you know, to start off is you have a lot of permits someplace, right? So they have to maintain and achieve all those permits and there are requirements within the contract such as this MMP. And they also have the noise and dust, fencing, erosion control. So the list of regulations that we have that they must meet is fairly long. And Steve, maybe you can I'm. Sure that's very accurate. Jan, there's a multiple of requirements that is required by the SEMA team per the contract. So there's air quality plans, fugitive dust plans, depending on the scope. First and foremost, I'd like to say that they have to comply with all codes, regulatory requirements and laws. But in addition to that, we require them to submit various plans for all these types of environmental concerns. And each one of those plans are approval documents. For the city to approve. Before they become part of the contract. The deliverable is currently part of the contract. The finalized plan will be as part of the design phase evolves to turn that into a final deliverable. So air quality dust, all kinds of environmental plans. Again, things dealing with endangered species. Where there's. Raptors or prairie dogs and all those types of things are all covered in the environmental requirements. Section five of the RFP that I was speaking of earlier has a complete list of all the different deliverables just from the environmental standpoint that is required. By the contract. Just for the record, there's no prairie dogs out there either. I hope not really. Okay. Yeah. We saved a prairie dog colony when I worked at RTD. So it's a quite it takes a lot of work, quite an ordeal. Those plans are a little thicker than you might think. Yes. And they're very tasty at the gym. Maybe you could explain, because we've heard a lot about global landing outfall and how the testing beforehand showed one thing. But then we took out a lot more. And Jason, actually, you were talking today earlier about what that actually represented, so maybe you could explain that or Andrew. He's the expert. So glows a little bit. Interesting story. So we did do a lot of environmental testing before the excavation started. Most of that was done with boring. And what we've learned through that is boring. We don't get good information on asbestos in soils and that's why we're doing the trenching instead of borings along 39th Avenue. So in Globeville landing as the excavation went along, we uncovered a lot more asbestos in soils than we expected. We made the decision to treat all of the excavation as contaminated with asbestos, which we've done in other projects in the city. So the numbers look like there's a lot of asbestos, but it's the numbers are a little bit elevated because we decided to treat it all as asbestos contaminated. So you're saying that any soil you took out of global landing outfall was treated as though it had asbestos? Whether you verified that or not, did you not bother it? We did verify it. We did okay. Yes. Okay. And so you're doing trenching at 39th rather than pothole ing? Yes. For on the new properties that the city is acquiring so that we get better information on asbestos as we go along. Have you done any of that yet or is that part of this contract? We don't have any of that data back yet. We did find building materials in some of the lots that the city has acquired our experiences. When you find building material, it's you know, it's about 5050, whether there's asbestos there or not. So we'll get that analytical data back in the next few weeks and let folks know as soon as we get it. All right. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilman Flynn. Councilwoman Black, I'm going to pop to Councilwoman Kimmich to enter into this discourse between councilman knew in his line of questioning. Councilman Cohen Yeah, I'm not quite sure why no one from the team has a copy of the contract and found these pages, but I went through to try to find them. So here are the references for your question, Councilman, to the first reference incorporating the RFP requirements is on page five. Then if you go to Exhibit A, it once again requires the contractor to follow all of the technical specifications from the RFP. The third reference is exhibit one, and that's actually where the proposer signs a document that says they will comply with everything that was in the RFP as well as within their RFP response. So that's exhibit one and then Exhibit J makes a similar reference. And then there's a special. Anthrax conditions. And if you go to the it's towards the end and in that section, it's all the there's no page numbers in our system. So I can't give you the PDF page number, but in the special contract provisions, it has specific paragraphs about regulations related to hazardous materials. So that's on page six, I believe, of that particular attachment. And it talks about all the hazardous materials, including all the things we've been talking about, asbestos, petroleum, etc.. And so, so anyway, so. These are these are the documents. This is right in front of us. Yes. And again. I looked through it. Yes. Well, it's because they don't use the word materials management, but it is just when you said it incorporates the RFP, but you can't provide us with a page reference or a section. It's very difficult. So going through and then finding where all of those requirements are actually in. So so there are six references that I've counted that incorporate the RFP. Plus there is this paragraph specifically about handling of hazardous waste and following all environmental regulations, including asbestos and all these chemicals. So so the contractor clearly has, in what I'm reading, signed all this. And if I'm getting any of this wrong again, this is your job, not mine. But this is what I found. If it's at all helpful, we do have the vice president, senior construction. Larry Walsh in the room. And if it's helpful, he can come up and also reinforce the fact that this is a contractual deliverable that he is required to produce. Is that helpful? I think I think we have got what you need. I think we got what we need. All right. Thank you, Mr. President. I'm going to go. Mr. President, I would like to hear it because the reference to the RFP is in the contract. Correct. But they are we don't have the RFP in front of us. So I would like to know that the RFP does require and I know that it does, but it would be nice if we had a link to it. Okay. It's reference and he signed it. But come on up here, Mr. Vice President. Sorry, Councilwoman Blackwell, your right to you. Well, thank you, President Brooks. Everything you heard from staff tonight is true. This will be our third design build contract with the city and county of Denver. We did your first to the Central Park Boulevard Project and I-70 and the Peoria Crossing Project. They were both design build. They both had material management plans that we will submit for approval. And yes, everything that was cited that is in the RFP and referenced in the contract we're accountable for. That's part of our contract. We understand that. You tell us your name. I'm Larry Walsh. Thank you. I'm with SEMA Construction. Okay. So you will be you will send us copies of the RFP, which that shows there shows there's a signed documents you've you've signed off on, right? Yes, we've signed the contract. We don't have an executed contract that is pending City Council's approval. You signed the RFP? Yes. What? We signed the contract for issued the RFP. And that's how we prepared our proposal and what it's based on. Yeah, it was. The city should have that. Yes, but but there is. Yes, absolutely. We will look at that. And it's referenced in all the the work that Councilman Kenny did. Thank you. To recite those references. We can highlight where the sections are in section five now. You'll be helpful. We've since we can't see that so be nice to. Yes, thank you. Absolutely. We will send that your way. Thank you, Councilwoman Black. Sorry. Thank you. Most of my questions were answered, but I just had one. So I think the real issue for neighbors is they need some reassurance that it's going to be cleaned up properly and safely. So I just was thinking of other. CITES as a Denver native that I know are now developed that once were industrial, like Lowry, Air Force Base Stapleton, the South Platte River used to really be a terrible place, right, John and Brighton Boulevard. So it seems to me that you all probably have standard operating procedures and I know we now know about amps, but whatever kind of assurances you can give to the people who live near there that they are going to be safe. And I understand their concerns. I also have confidence in all of you and in SEMA, but I think that's what everyone is mostly concerned about. Yeah, no, I think is really good comment and we've heard it through our process. And so, you know, safety to our community is the number one priority. We're going to do everything we can to ensure that they are safe. We've showed how we've gone over and beyond in our contract language to to make sure that that's the case. And every detail that we have, we're going to be transparent. We're going to share it. It's not our standard practice to do that, and we understand the concerns and we're willing to do that. So, I mean, I hope that's enough to just say it is our priority. We will do everything we can to ensure safety. And as you mentioned, we have lots of experience. We we work in an urban environment every day. We have a lot of experience and public works working on things like this as is not anything new. The fuel tanks you learned about the the landfills, arsenic lead, these are all things we run into on every one of our projects. So we're confident that we'll be all handle in a safe way. I don't know if you have other things. I'd just like to add that the Globeville Landing Outfall Project, we've had air monitoring the entire time and not had a single detection of contaminants from the site. And so we feel we can do this project similarly without having any air deposition or anything that's going to cause harm to the residency. If we felt that we were going to cause harm to the residents, we wouldn't be doing this project. How often are you at Globeville? For air monitoring you yourself. I'm not there very often, to tell you the truth. This project will be different. I'll be out there quite a bit. Okay. Councilman Espinosa. What is the LED action level that you're using in the soils? We're using the the EPA, Vasquez Boulevard, a 70 Superfund site number, which is 400 milligrams per kg. So. In the soils. The summary that we got mentions borings. But you said that you did pothole. So is it pothole or is boring? Well, we use those terms interchangeably. So they were borings done in the right of way. So to me, a boring involves a, you know, a soil sample a drill that you. Know, they were done that group that way. So not partly correct. He's just really literally digging up some dirt. Yes. They were done with a physical, boring machine, a drill. Okay. At what depths were the soils taken, the samples taken from? I'd have to check to be accurate because we did two rounds and they were done differently. But we were trying to characterize sort of the top 12 inches and then below 12 inches. So I don't have the exact numbers. Right. I just I get frustrated when we ask for soil samples and we get a summary that just says we took 70 borings and we found two hot spots. And that I much would rather just you hear, give me give me the executive summary. But also I'm sure you get that too. Because that sort of matters because at 400 a 400 is is, is, is, you know, you couldn't use that soil to put on top of the lid that we're going to build. You couldn't stockpile 400, microgram soil, stockpile it, and then put it on the lid. That is going to be the playground for the elementary school. That is that is an action level. Correct. Is it not? Yes, that's correct. So and then this. Area. It gets keeps getting marketed as a park sort of space. Is that play area or not? So those soils that have elevated lead will be removed and taken to a landfill and replaced with clean fill. But so what happens with the soils that don't have elevated lead? And are we talking what is elevated lead story? This is sort of the problem with not having an MP and sort of moving forward without knowing what it is that we're dealing with and how we're going to deal with it is and which is why I actually don't see any problem with saying, let's kill this thing and wait two months while you guys wrap it up, at least an MP, because now I'm confused that we have to amend piece, you know, one that the city is doing and we're going to somehow manage and one that the contractor is going to do and they're going to manage. You know. So I will ask more questions on that. Sure. What is what is the real danger to our community and constituents with with completing your testing, completing your MP before proceeding with a contract? So what is the danger in doing that to. Continue what we're doing right now? There's no danger from my perspective. I didn't think so. So it now comes down to just dollars, right? Is that the concern from public works that it's going to cost more money or might cost more money? We've got the SEMA guy here. How much more can it cost for you guys to wait two months? You'd be surprised, though, those delays do add up. And it's also a risk that he's going. To eat a whole bunch of unknowns. But a risk on our contract, right. Delays in those costs. And really, this is just the standard way that we do business. We do an maybe we will make sure that that's in place before we move any dirt. And MMP is a process that's not going to give you the levels of the lead. And an arsenic is what we do is the process in place. It's very a standard document that comes along with any project. I'm talking about the sort of standard operating procedure of, of, of, of, of. So one of my problems in prior government work that I had done was the lack of due diligence on things that we could know before we entered into any agreement, not saying that we couldn't mitigate anything that we found because we certainly have enough resources and technology and skills to do that. But we could know the problem in the right away and land and we're acquiring and all this thing we could be testing, testing, testing and come up with a full report and say this is to the best of our knowledge, the totality of what we might find. And even this tells us, I mean, has huge question marks on it because we never truly know what we find until we find until we start digging. And what you're simply saying is, well, we're we're just comfortable starting that now, even though we have people that live in immediate proximity to this operation going, we want to know more. So what is the real danger if it's just simply some some dollars to simmer for us doing that extra due diligence and getting people, you know, familiar with this is the level of of of of of lead we have in the soil. Arsenic is is consistent with other samplings that we've taken at other projects that we've completed with no health hazards or what. You know, in doing that. You know, I think it's a great concern. We want to do as much due diligence as we can to minimize our risk as an owner. I think an Andrew can come up here, but I think he would agree that we feel like we have done the due diligence that we need to understand what the risk is and we will continue as we acquire these properties. So we've done everything we can. We've made Swiss cheese of our right away those 71 warnings. Now as we obtain and acquire additional. Say that when the samples haven't even been. Know we. Have we've gotten results on a right away. What he was mentioning is we don't have the results from the private property. Right. So that's what will be coming in in a week's time. Right. So we'll continue to get better and better data. But again, it's just our this is the normal process. And in our normal procedures of when an MP comes into place, you need to move in and understand your procedures a little bit better and move in. What I'm trying to articulate to you isn't, is I get it that that's your normal procedure, but it's not every day. Well, it is sort of every day that we go into sort of toxic, hazardous conditions. But it is not every day that we go in at this magnitude, this scale. And and what is the real danger in fully completing our takedown of land, doing all the, you know, testing that we would normally want to do to sort of ascertain the scope, the level of the best of you know, I know that you're comfortable because that's what you do for a living. But what about the layperson that is like, hey, you're digging up, you're kicking up dust. Some guys are going to go maybe have a hose on it, might be working on a weekend and might not have a hose on it, might be doing it on a holiday. What should I be concerned about and when? Who am I going to report to and why? You know, what in what should I do with my kids during this period of time, you know, is because I can tell you that 400 micrograms of lead is an action level in a play area. And even though it's the limit for the rest of the soil is three times that amount, somewhere between 412 hundred is a lot of lead to be kicking around. And so that's what doing all this testing, knowing the totality of where it's at. Getting it into the cities MP would be beneficial to the public and I don't see what the danger is in that. If it's dollars, I mean we're talking about health and environment and health concerns and stress. So. All right. So if I may, I just wanted to chime in because it is every day that the city does projects in contaminated areas. Carl in Madison Rec Center, which is opening this week, we acquired a gas station. We found a leaking underground storage tank as part of that acquisition. We manage that contamination as part of the Project Lavillenie outfall. We're doing a massive excavation through a Superfund site, through landfill material. This is what Public Works does. Yeah, I'm going to. Tell you the problem with that charge ahead attitude, which is, what, just a few months ago. Questions. Questions. All right. Well, okay. How much did the Shoemaker Plaza was it supposed to cost initially? I think the original budget was around $4 million. It was only 1 to $2 million, actually. Okay. I mean. All right. So how much. Did it vary from the Budget Office? I think the amount was somewhere north of 3. Million on topic, though. Close to 4 million. Well. Well, she's the one that brought up this everyday problem. And here's what we need to fundamentally understand about that. Go at it, go rogue and hope for the best. And we have unlimited funds to do what it is that we're setting out to do because we don't. How much does Shoemaker Plaza end up costing it? It ended up costing close to it, I think was an additional $4 million because of the culture we found. Exactly. That is something we could have tested for. That is something we could have set up a drill rig on top of that plasma that existed there that day and drilled down and found coal tar and got off. I don't know that we have enough money to do this right now because there's a contamination problem. Let's find out the extent of this. Is it everywhere underneath here? Well, first of all, we did test and you didn't find it in the Shoemaker Plaza project. But as is often the case, when you're dealing with old industrial areas or non homogenous areas like low sampling gives you an idea, but it's never going to give you the full picture. But again, sampling is one of the ways we mitigate risk. We also have contingency to address environmental concerns and environmental risks that are not anticipated at the time that we do the testing and develop the plans. But now we're holding contingency. As a city council and approving these things and fiduciary oversight and whatnot. The when we do that and we allow you to sort of take your best guess and march on things that we could actually learn. Just because we want to save a few million dollars and it is costing us more millions of dollars that comes from other projects that we're trying to get funded. And that doesn't help our case when we continue to go down that road, which is, well, our standard operating procedures sort of act with some degree of blindness, and we know that we're blind. You know, when all I'm saying is, what's two more months waiting for these soils tests in developing a better picture? Even with those additional soil tests, we will not have perfect knowledge of what we're going to find when we go out there. We're never going to have perfect knowledge until you actually do the excavation. But we think we have enough information at this point to move forward with a contract. We have budget to deal with the environmental issues that we're anticipating and we have contingency to deal with those conditions that we haven't yet discovered in the event that we run into. Okay. So then that's the difference between where you are as an attorney and where I am as a counselor, because I don't feel like I have enough information. And I think Wayne clearly doesn't even know me. He hasn't seen the map that because it's attached to some I mean, that requirement is attached to an RFP that was issued only to the contractors and never shared with counsel. Well, and it is on your website. We just sent a link to everybody and so it has been on the website and now you have a link that will direct you exactly there. Councilman, can I go to Cashman and you can come back. Okay. You still got some more questions? No, I will look for that. Okay. Councilman Cashman. Thank you, Mr. President. Andrew Please remember, his name is new to me. I remember. His name. Andrew So it is 71 borings. I think you got results from half of those. Is that about right? I know we have results from all those, but it was added to the boards. So no, we have data from all 71 samples. What's the data you said you're waiting for? That's that's information or data that we collected on private parcels that the city has acquired since November 2017. And those are coming up in the near future. You said. Yes. So we started those as soon as the we acquired those in late November. And generally speaking, it takes about six weeks to get analytical results back. And with the holiday and. About, how many borings, approximately, are we waiting for? I believe it's around seven trenches that we did. The trenches is a little bit bigger than a boring. I understand. And so I'm sorry. I just sure if I can add to the question. So we've begun to explore private properties, correct, that we're acquiring. How much more of that are we looking at? Another ten bore trenches, another hundred trenches as we go down the corridor? Where about are we at? So we will do trenches on every parcel we acquire and. And it's about 30, approximately 30 parcels total. And so we're just at the very beginning stages. Okay. Thank you. That's all, Mr. President. Thank you. Councilman Castro. Councilman Ortega. Thank you, Mr. President. So we all received the pinion report information today. So this tells us exactly where certain properties were tested. And these were these were public properties, correct? Yes. Those were properties that were owned by the city and county in 2016. Okay. And who is it that is doing the materials management plan? Is that being done by SEMA? Is that a separate contract? Are we environmental health doing that? So it gets a little confusing because there's two different elements in this. One, the one that was referenced earlier that we just got it today will see the. That. Be released in three weeks. Yes, that is one that we had Pinon as our contractor. Right, for us. And so it will actually be Department of Public Health and Environment document and that will be for the environmental work that will happen before SEMA comes in to do the excavation. Okay. So just to be clear, though. The. The borings that were done that were part of this report is is what the materials management plan is based off of knowing what contaminants we've found in the soil, sort of generally where we've found them. We know we need to do more borings on the private property that we're acquiring because we haven't had access to that, correct? That's correct. But we also did sort of desktop evaluations of the private properties so that we have ideas where there's potentially building debris, potentially underground storage tanks. So those are things that we we think we know from looking at old maps are important. So based on that data, that helps you determine where on the properties to do those borings. Correct? Okay. And typically, how many borings on each property would I assume that that's based on how much land each parcel entails? Yeah, it depends upon that. Tabletop exercise of. Looking at older documents in older, older city documents of what was the land use, you know, going back to the founding of the city. So if if we think that there's only one house, it might have been on a parcel and it's now gone. We might just do one trench. But if we think that there was multiple things going on that property, we might do multiple trenches. So just to kind of put this into perspective, Andrew, the work that's been happening on GLOW and that's what this this document is all about. Because of what was on that site. Is it safe to say that we knew that? Well, first of all, it was a it's an EPA operable unit. So the minute you get in there and start tinkering around with the soils, it it throws you into that EPA oversight, which is different from the 39th Avenue Channel because we're talking about. Parcels that were not residential unless they were some of those where property owners chose not to have work done on them. But so is it safe to say that? That site was far more contaminated. Not to discount the concerns that community folks have raised along the 39th Avenue Channel, but having it been a former operating lead smelter and a landfill that we anticipated finding a lot more nasty stuff in those soils than we think we might over here. I was definitely in the big difference is the landfill. So we knew that we'd be opening up the landfill global and we just didn't know what we'd find. When you open up a landfill, you never know what you're going to find, even no matter how many borings you do prior to that. So. Have we encountered any methane at all? Surprisingly, no. So methane has not been a problem at global landing. Okay. So just the last thing. The federal law, the Resource Conservation Recovery Act really is what ensures that we have some of these various procedures in our contracts to ensure that we're not just making the contractor follow what we tell them, but it's what the feds mandate that we do under and to recruit. Correct? Correct. Okay. And the materials management plan is really a reflection of environmental law and regulations. So all of that is built into the MMP. Okay. Thank you. I have no further questions. Thank you. Councilwoman Ortega, I'm going to ask a question. To my engineer fled. What, Bruce? Yes. In the back. Thank you, sir. So. So. I have a question for you around. You know, we're talking about this issue came up to me in 2018 when the EPA came and said that we had hundreds of homes who they hadn't tested yet. And so the fear came up to me is what's happening on our current environment when flooding occurs in the dirt like. Can some of these arson addicts lead and issues get you know on a flood traveled through our neighborhood in our houses with our kids. How at risk are we in this neighborhood of coal? Council President Honestly, I'm not the right person to answer that question. I deal with the stormwater that kind of can't get into the pipes and runs on the streets and gets pretty deep and goes in across spaces. So I have. To defer. To the EPA and the people on. That. Okay. Can anybody answer that question? My question is, are we at risk? I had this question come from a community member of if nothing is dug up, are we at risk anyway in our own yards and things like that, especially during in May when it's it's the rainy season and it's flooding and things like that? Well, there's always a potential that there could be a problem if there was enough rainfall to wash that dirt into a receiving water and go on downstream. But you have to have an exposure for for there to be a problem in your body. So you have to. Drink that water, which I wouldn't advise him really to be drinking out of the gutters. So, you know, as long as it's, you know, normal processes, it is going to end up in the South Platte and go downstream. But that's going to take a really extreme storm event for that to happen. Okay. And then quick question before I go to Councilman Espinosa and then you can probably answer this. The number of you know, I did get a chance to talk to some of the folks who were a part of the the group that you had of of neighbors, what you call group design work group. How many times did you guys meet? In the past we met. You know, it really was topic driven, but it was basically about every three months. Okay. And how many times monthly? You know, as information came in, if we had that amount of information. But consistently we met about every three months. How many people were in the design work group? It varied. I think what we have on our list is about 17 people and that would vary in attendance anywhere from, you know, seven to the full amount of people. And those were all folks who were in the impact zone, which I call right on 39th, between 39th and 38th, where they all folks who lived in. Right in that area or all around Cole. Yes. I mean, really, you also had R.A. President. We have the pride representative. So it was broader than just the residents. But there were probably, you know, Debra montoya and folks that you heard from tonight were on our design work group. So a lot of them were residents, right, between Franklin and High. Or was there anybody in the design work group? And I don't know, because I know a lot of folks have left because it's late at night. But who spoke in opposition? Do we know anybody from? No, not that. SAT on our design work group. He you know, and would come as a guest and he would speak. And so we had opportunity for that and they could listen. But that was actually on the design work group. So. Mr.. Romney. Okay. Uh. Councilman Espinosa. Yeah. So I followed the link. There are eight attachments there. There is not a single RFP. The closest we get is a reference in the contract exhibit I, the RFP response, which says incorporated herein by reference as amended and supplemented by exhibit, I mean a one sorry which is not attached. There's simply exhibit I, so I don't have a copy of the RFP. You never get them. Okay, well, we thought Angela said that she sent you a link. Did you click on the link that Angela has sent? And so I immediately had responded back to her and said that we what we are looking for is the RFP submitted to the company and issued to the contractors. She sent me a link to the. Hold on real quick. Councilman. Councilman knew that you. Did you see it? I looked through the same. I didn't see the RFP at all. I looked through every one of the documents to see, like a thousand pages, but I didn't see anything. The RFP. Yeah, we just. John McGrath City Attorney's Office. The RFP is a reference document that's incorporated. By reference. And is a part of, of the contract documents. And is binding on the. Contractor. So we can point you to the Met. To the exhibit or to the reference. The RFP is a lengthy document, including the technical. Specifications and technical. Requirements is. Probably over. 300 pages. So physically attaching it to the document that you see in front of you hasn't been done, but it's incorporated by reference in various places. In the contract. And unfortunately I didn't come with. A hard copy of the contract with me. But we're happy to get you the references to the various places. And this is not you didn't do anything wrong, trust me. You didn't do anything wrong. This is sort of normal, right? The RFP is something that gets issued very early in the process and the contract sort of as a result of that. But we're talking about about these hazardous materials and how we're going to treat them. And to Wayne's point, when it brought up this question and then we ended up in this cross talk where it sort of revolved, you know, it also has its genesis in the RFP. And all I'm saying is, at this point in time, we do not have that and we didn't have that. And so we wouldn't have been able to even connect that, Don, until this very conversation, which is, again, why I'm sitting here sort of going, well, what is the danger in us taking a little more time and trying to understand? Because now we now we learn that there is not one but two management plans in place, one that is going to be managed in within the contractors purview, and one that is going to be in the city's purview. And and I don't understand that division of work, to be honest. And so there's there's a lot there that is and that is the crux of the concern that we've heard is about hazardous materials and the impacts that it has. And so what it's done is it's raised more questions and it's answered for for for somebody like myself. And so I'm looking for the source documents and the follow up sort of drafts. If we don't have the one we have today, at least a sort of example of what we might do on a similar project, maybe the gold landing for an example, to sort of see how we merge these two overlapping seemingly management requirement. I mean, management plans, you know, well, I think as has been described. This is a design build project. That's the delivery. Method we've chosen. And in a. Design build project, it's really an evolving process. You you start from where we are today and we're at a limited level of design right now. And I think, as Jessica mentioned, that as the process evolves, you get more and more information and then you act on that information. So material management plans will evolve as more information is revealed. During the course of the of the project, of the project. And so what we have in the. Contract is the requirements. The requirement is for the contractor to deliver a material management plan. The city then has the right to review it and approve it. And it's a again, it's an evolving. Give and take process, so to say, well, let's wait until we get two weeks or two months or some number of days further. We won't get any further in design during that period of time or we. Won't get any further with our. Onsite work. And so we'll be pretty much in the same place two months from now as we are today, because that information. Will not. Be evolving and we will not be learning more about what it is. We need to deal with. We know a certain level. We have done due diligence that tells us what's on our radar. And then as the process evolves, both. In design and on site, work. Will continue to. Fine tune that. So maybe my confusion is actually maybe it's the wrong term. Maybe it's the fact that we've been sort of treating this as to my piece is the way it was discussed. So what is based on what you were just saying, I get a different understanding, which is as we take down land, we are performing , sampling and testing and providing environmental reports that the contractor is then required to do the management plan. We're and then we will review it. We don't actually have or we don't produce our own. Well, in this case, on the land that we take down, we are doing our own analysis. And that will be. As a city, responsibility. For those. Properties. Then as the project evolves and we're disturbing soils. There'll be a. Contractor generated materials management plan that we will then review, approve. And administer. Through separate testing or through. And you doing your further testing. Okay. Thank you. Real quick if if it's helpful councilman new in Espinosa that mishap. Haynes did email the technical requirements to all you guys and it's about 200 pages and on page 45 is the beginning of section number 5.0 of an environmental and on page 52 shows a deliverable in the Contract for Materials Management Plan as well as the other environmental deliverables required per the contract. And one of the things that that may help to clarify just a little bit in typical business that we do a lot of design bid build right in typically the materials management plan is a function of the design . Under the design build. We can't do those types of plans until we've hired the engineer of record and that's who Sema now is. So as they develop the design under the design build delivery method, the materials management plans and all the things you typically would. See in a design bid build will be produced. And approved by the city as part of the design phase. Thank you, Councilman Flynn. Thank you. I think that got to some of my questions. Just some some simple. Yes. In those materials management plan is not a document that tells us what's in the ground. It tells us how we're going to handle what we find in the ground. Correct? Right. Yes or no? That's that's correct. Thank you. So Sema can't develop the map until it has a contract, is that correct? Yes, Mr. Walsh. And not going to do that for free? I suppose that is correct. That's okay. That's an unusual concept. People didn't wanting to be paid for their work. So so the map will be developed by SEMA after they have the contract and there will be a plan review by the city and they won't move a shovel full of dirt until you approve that. Is that correct? That is 100% correct, sir. All right. Thank you. Councilman Ortega. Okay not to beat this dead horse. So we also have our own material management plan that's been done. My opinion, based on the borings that we've had them do for us on the properties that we've already tested and we're starting to do that on properties were acquiring, which is per the contract that we just approved, right? Correct. And so that that's our own guide for what we know is in the soils. Our management plan tells us how we believe they should be handled and then the contractor will go do that as well. And hopefully they're not going in the same boreholes. They're looking at other locations on the on the parcels that they're going to be doing, any of the sampling? Correct. So the MLP that we're developing will be for any remediation work that we do prior to SEMA taking over a property. So if we find something. We're doing that cleanup. We'll do the cleanup under the under the city's MMP. Okay. So where is that covered in the costs? If we're doing that clean up initially. I mean, I, I just assume that was part of the work the contractor would be doing. Yeah. So within the contract we just have what, what's already been in the RFP documents and that's what SEMA has agreed to as part of the RFP. We do have an environmental bucket where we will budget a bucket budget, a budget where that additional cleanup will come out of. So we do have some things set aside outside of seeing this contract for that cleanup for those private properties. So just to be clear, getting back to the big picture budget, do we have a contingency in each of the budgets and then an overall contingency left in the total? We do. Okay. So the way we developed all the projects is every project has its own contingency. So City Park Golf Course has one below 39th Avenue and Park Hill all have their own contingencies. And then we have an overall what we're calling a program contingency. So the program contingency is kind of for those unknown unknowns, and we would expand our project contingency before we would go into that program contingency. Okay. And not to convoluted this, but we have a separate budgetary appropriation that will come to us next week to committee. Right. That will come out of wastewater that will actually cover these costs. So this is the contract with the contractor, but we will be seeing a separate bill come to council that will transfer monies from wastewater into the project that will cover part of these costs. So there will be a another action that we'll ask you to take for issuance of bond money. Right. So as part of the rate increase, there was a bond issuance in 2016. Right. And that was for about 130 million and more is coming up. So I don't say around numbers. And then this will be for the additional amount to get us up to the 206, which made the 206 for the bond part of the 298. Okay. I just thought it was important to mention that. So it doesn't come as a surprise to you when that part of this project moves forward. So, Laura, is there anything else you wanted to add? I just want to clarify. There were two actions that was introduced by the floor Perry Capital Program Manager in the Department of Finance. When we brought for the rate increase to City Council in July of 2016, as part of that six year program, there were two revenue bond issuances that were attributed to the Part two Park Hill project. 115 million were fully. Brought forward to council late last year. The second issuance is planned for to come forward to council in the next couple of weeks, and that is planned to be $77 million. Great. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President. All right. Thank you. Just want to take. It tells me. Cashman. No. Okay. I think we finished our questions. See no other questions. 1395 hearing. 439 five is not close. Comments by members of Council. I'll go first. This being District nine in my neighborhood and in a long, long, long conversation with the community and the city. So in Denver. Correct. 2015 or 2016? 2015. January. I'll never forget it. We're in Jake's and there are over a hundred neighbors in there because they're being told that many homes are going to be taken out because of a drainage project. And, you know, and Jennifer and I and the team have gone over this that downtime is probably one of the worst starts to a process that I've seen when folks who were super supportive of what the city had done prior to were all of a sudden skeptical, did not believe, did not believe in the process and all of those things. I will say that the process really improved and it really improved. Getting that group together, that was around the 39th Avenue Channel. The steering committee is what I really call them, 17 members that you heard here. And I think that really was really helpful for the community to really walk with the city to see what was going on around this project. This is this has been a tough one because for whatever it whatever reason at the city, we can never get our process right. We struggle with our outreach. But here I would say that we improved our outreach of the 17 members of the committee. One my neighbor here, Mr. Eddie Armijo, is in opposition and a lot of those neighbors live right there on 39th. And you heard from one of them earlier tonight. Let me let me tell you something. In 2013. And people have always asked me in the community, you know, we feel like this is tied to I-70. We feel like there are all these other issues going on. Why can you why do you see yourself supportive of this? How do you support a drainage project like this? 20 1300 year flood in Boulder. I don't know if you guys remember that 100 year storm, if that same storm would have happened, not just in my neighborhood, Councilwoman Ortega, but in the Mark Moncler Basin, which has proven to be the worst basin in the city of Denver before I-70 was an issue. Everything else that was the worst basin. You know why? Because everybody was calling me and emailed me in 2011 to fix that. Way before. CityLab. I don't know if many people have heard CityLab. With our recent climate change issues going on globally, CityLab just came out with two articles. And CityLab is for folks who are urbanist and folks who are city dwellers to think about best practices across the country. CityLab came out with an article saying. If cities do not start investing in drainage now, they will pay for it in the future. They came up with another article after everything that happened in Houston, after everything that happened in and in Florida, saying that make the proper investments now. This is this is best practices. This is why I am supportive of this project. I'm not supportive of bad processes. I'm not supportive of individuals in my community not having a clear understanding about contaminants. And we must get much better at that. You guys, this description that I've heard tonight has been a good description. But for whatever reason, there are people in my community who do not feel like it's transparent. They do not feel like they have a good understanding of it. And so we've got to improve our process. And that's why you have folks sitting here in opposition. Some of the major issues that I needed to solve tonight for me to be in favor was I've heard from three individuals in my community that we only had testing of three borings. And I think you made that very clear. We had over 71 testing and two contaminants. And so that was incredibly important. Another another important factor for me was that entire steering committee that was around the 39th Avenue Channel. And the specific comments that they made to me of saying why they were supportive when they weren't supportive originally and what got them there. So tonight, you know, I'm going to be supporting this this whole and Councilwoman Ortega said we have to look at the entire the macro program of all of this, the macro of the plans of Parkview for folks in my district. 3500 households have greater flood protection than they would have if we did not do this. 3500 households. So. For folks to understand my reasoning. That's it. At the end of the day. You know, Councilman Espinosa said, how are you going to look back three years from now for for him? He wanted to look back three years from now, three years from now, if anything happened. And I can't look at those constituents and say I voted no because I was scared. That this wasn't the right move. 3500 households. You don't have to be proud of me, I'm telling you. I've looked at the data and that data I have in front of me today, I feel confident in that. And so that's why I'll be supporting. Yes. Counsel Mark Taylor. Thank you, Mr. President. So as I said earlier, you know, this project started looking at how we would address the problem in the neighborhood. And I actually advocated with Diane Barrett that we go to see that and say instead of spent spending the $40 million on I-70, let's address this problem in the cool neighborhood. That's what we started out addressing. It became a much bigger problem than that or project, I should say. So I am supportive of this tonight in working forward to address the problem. I only wish that when all of this came forward, we would have solved the problem for the Globeville neighborhood, because the Globeville neighborhood is still going to see flooding happen on the west side of the riverbank. And, you know, I challenged our our manager of public works at the time that we needed to include money in this budget to solve that problem concurrently with solving the problems that we're doing for this area. I also wish we would have been as focused and concerned about the health impacts to the Globeville, Swansea and neighborhoods with the I-70 project. That is also going to upset what we know are heavy metals in those soils because that's where all the Asarco contamination spread to. And as they were getting to the end of the cleanup in the Globeville neighborhood, part of the settlement was they had to keep testing beyond Globeville. They went to Elyria, they went to Swansea and they went into coal, went into Clayton. That's why this is now the Vasquez I-70 Superfund site. And again, many of those properties were cleaned up. I have a map right here showing which ones had which contaminants. We also know that arsenic was something that was found in neighborhoods all around the city and in the Globeville neighborhood. They used to have a yellow front store that sold fertilizer. That's one of the things that that has arsenic. And so there was argument back and forth between Asarco and CDB at the time as to whether or not that contamination came from yellow for it or whether it actually came from Asarco. And so, you know, that's kind of irrelevant to this conversation right now, but I think it's important to to know some of that history of how it was argued that we saw arsenic throughout these neighborhoods and then they compared these neighborhoods to neighborhoods across the city and found similar contaminants of arsenic. So I think this is a project that needs to happen in terms of solving the flooding problem for this area of the city. And I will be supporting this tonight. I also want to just say thank you to all of the city folks who have met with me on multiple occasions regarding this drainage issue, because I've had many questions and many concerns and just appreciate the time you all have taken to to sit down with me and answer my questions. Yes, Councilman Ortega, it's been a labor of love for the city team. Well done, Councilwoman and Councilman Cashman. I apologize. I don't even go there. Thank you, Mr. President. So I'll be thrilled when 3500 homes get get added flood protection. But I just don't believe in the staff knows this. I don't believe this program's cooked long enough. I truly don't it I don't believe we're worried about delaying for two months because of costs. Other than that, we've got to get this going again because we have an intergovernmental agreement that the previous council signed that has dates where we need to get this done so it doesn't hold up the I-70 project or we pay at least $5,000 a day. And this is this is part of that, with all deference to to this being stock show celebration night, this is not my first rodeo when it comes to Superfund style hazards. I have familiarity with agencies who are charged with protecting the public health but failed to carry out their charge. I cut my teeth environmentally. As a journalist covering the remediation remediation of hazardous waste created by decades of radium process at Shattuck Chemical Company on South Bannock Street, also known as operable unit number eight, and in that case, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment spent a few years telling the neighborhood , this is safe, we're not going to dig this garbage up and carted out of town. We're going to mix it with cement and bury it on site. And they did that. They created this huge monolith in the overland neighborhood until Senator Wayne Allard arranged for Senate hearings that were held at the Washington Park Community Center and John Collins Church. And evidence finally came up after years of looking out at city staff that was frustrated and wondering why the neighborhood neighbors kept complaining. And they dug it all up and they finally carted away in the case of the 39th Avenue Channel. There is no distance from from the homes to the project. That's. That's. A painful truth. And we're looking at the beginnings of getting the information that we need that would make me more comfortable supporting this. We've got part of the borings trenches done. We've got this materials management plan that's going to get done. And I understand that it's going to cook along with the project. It's a dynamic document, but I haven't seen it yet. And like I say, I mean, I've had good people, good, honest people think they had the right, right deal here. If I'm living next to that that channel, I'm not dealing with promises. I want all the information possible before I'm going to say that this is something that I'm going to declare safe. Because like I said, I've heard it before. I've heard it before. So I definitely am not going to support this tonight. And like I say it, it's moving too fast for the wrong reasons. Thank you, Mr. President. All right. Thank you. Councilman Castro comes to this one was first happy. And Angela, thank you for working to get this document. I love this RFP. This is this is all the data. I mean, all the information. I, I, I wish we were getting. I get why we don't, but don't be surprised if I ask for these in the future because it's all here. And I could have known it back in April of this year or last year. Actually, the the the so something I don't know that, you know, I sort of wish the whole room were still here. So something that I think staff may know or maybe may not, but I don't know that the general public knows is that of all of these two basic drainage projects, this is the only one that I actually genuinely love. I like this project. I don't like that. It's a it's a you know, it's a stormwater project for CDOT. I do like the project is a stormwater project for North Denver and East Denver and everything north of 39th Avenue. I do wish we were piping from. The city park. And more from Park Hill golf course over to this because it certainly has the capacity, given those ginormous conduits that we put over at Globeville. But then I don't like what we're doing to Globeville and the Platte River there, because I do think. But I mean, this is. This has got the potential to be a better version of our Lakewood Gulch. You know something? If it were if we were to take better advantage of the development opportunities along the north edge of this, something akin to Speer Boulevard, you know, the Cherry Creek thing. And so you're sort of accommodating multiple. You're creating a good public amenity. You're creating a, you know, a healthy environment. You're cleaning up toxins in the process. And you're you're. You're you're you're. Far exceeding any sort of stormwater needs that we had established in our 2014 master plan buy, buy, buy, buy huge amounts of acre feet. So if it were B and C, that wasn't part of this damn picture. This is the one project, the opportunity we should be taking and we should be funneling everything into this. And but we should also be doing it right. This is our AP lays out an acquisition timetable that goes all the way until mid mid next year or this year. So June of this year. And so to me, there's nothing. It's prudent. It's. Yeah, it's dollars. But hell, this. The market might change and Trump might do something stupid and everything. Like all the things that we do we love and hope and dream for are are, you know, something? The market is is vulnerable. It always has been and always will be. And it's our decisions that sort of help support good things and bad things. And and so what's tough is at a time when we have record high prices in construction and we just leveraged multiple hundreds of millions of dollars in the National Lessner Center and the FAA, the airport and the storm water thing, and now bonds. There's no shortage of work here. There's shortage of workers. There's no shortage of housing. There's a shortage of affordable housing. And this level of investment can be captured, whether it's now or six months from now. That's a job that Semur would be glad to take whenever Denver offers it. And if the only reason is, is again, you know, we have an IGA, we have a commitment and you know, you, the councilmen have a fiduciary responsibility to to rubber stamp this stuff, even with a bunch of unknowns. And that could be knowable and a bunch of information that we could provide the public, but we just don't have it yet is that's not my idea. I'm sorry. Yeah, I adopted it, but I you know, the people of Northwest Denver put me here. You guys timed it such that I didn't have a say in that idea. And and but I do now. And there is if see that's a real partner with us in is concerned about people the way we are they should be willing to amend that ACA if this is somehow a deal breaker because guess what, their own timetable, their own commitments to their parties have not been met. They're missing their deadlines. They're you know, their promises are not on the timetable that they've been throwing out. There might be for a whole host of reasons. Some of them we all know about because I'm going to talk about them right now. Because that's what it boils down to. If we learned anything from the city park decision, is that the lack there, the lack the decision or lack thereof? Because it really wasn't a decision. It was just a ceding of that responsibility to us. Is that the power and responsibility to look after the health and safety concerns of citizens and the environment of Denver lies here in the legislative branch. It's using our charter authority to exercise oversight over the executive branch. The judge basically said that. You know, it's like, you know, I see problems in what we're doing, what's being proposed here, but it's not the judicial job to do this. That's what you have a legislative body for. And that legislative body paved the way through that IGA. And that legislative body needs to sort of correct course. This is a good project. I like this project, don't get me wrong, but I don't like the way we we steamroll and force it down our public's throat. We've done it too many times to too much this recently. And even though this is probably the best of these projects, this is also the one that's going through the most toxic soil in the whole adventure. And it's the one that we can we're requiring all this land that we can know more about, what it is that we're about to undertake, and we can be more transparent and let people know. And make it make a clear case that there's nothing better for for North Denver, even though it does have this seed component. You know, in a perfect world, that sucker would go away and we'd have all this great development and opportunity. And this would dry up the boulevard for for redevelopment and it would be riverfront on steroids. Except for if we do that. I want tools. And I've been fighting them for over for two and a half years here. Tools to address displacement and gentrification. When you bring it, when you put that much opportunity in an area, people are going to get pushed. And that's no different, actually, with this amenity. To be honest with you, people like and who've been there for 60 years. You know, once they start, if you've been there for 60 years, he probably went from a sort of a a life of sort of expanding income to now a point in his life where he's probably on a fixed income. And when we do this sort of level of investment and we his property values continue to go through the roof and his fixed is a fixed income, but it means cost of living in life. Expenses. Expenses go up. That's who gets pushed out. We still don't have tools for that. But it's been stated time and time again that we care about the citizens. You know, it's going to be in the home plan. So I'm going in a whole bunch of areas. But these decision, these investments in infrastructure matter and we're we're blindly going into the dirt here and readily chalking up to the fact that, yeah, we know that there's millions of dollars worth of unknowns there, and that's okay. But that's millions of dollars that could be doing other things for this city. And why not look at this? Because I was just told three weeks ago. That. Yes, that that that that water that is being detained in City Park could actually be put into this 39th Avenue channel. And all the capacity that she needs is it would be maintained. That's a first it's the first time I was hearing that after being essentially acknowledged that that was not the case, that these two components were needed in order to preserve 100 year storm water mitigation for for the highway. So if that's the case, we just squandered another $100 million in in in that effort. And and that is money that could have been done for affordable housing by, you know, granted, this is a completely different thing. But it's an ask of our citizens for a long period of time. And so rather than helping people citywide, we're helping we're doing this one thing for what? So I'm rambling my point. I mean, it's just you can see that I'm frustrated because I want if we if plan support if this 39th Avenue channel is the only project to come forward. I would be working hard to try and make sure that the public was comfortable with what we were doing and making sure that it happened. And but but we're doing this. There's this the thing that, you know, everyone's going to laugh because I'm referencing Chairman Sekou that the thing about he and him talking about the trust issue is because of what happened on that sales job. You know, oh, these things have nothing to do with the highway when they had everything to do with the highway. Had nothing to do with the highway. Had everything to do with the IGA. The only reason we fast tracked those things versus this. You know, and so. So I'm just it's a message to everybody. It is our responsibility on council. We can't rely on people raising their voice, putting their own money and time into suing the city to try and get us to do the right thing when it's just a matter of us going, you know what? What is too much? What is what is going till June 30th when we have them almost the entirety of the soil testing done? We have a very good understanding of what's what's to come, what's wrong? The cost of borings. The cost of these tests are cheap. To get a better profile of what's there. But I can, you know, so it's just, you know, I. So, again, I don't I'm not opposing this because I don't like the project. I am opposing this because I don't think it has to happen right now today. I think it can happen in the first two quarters of this year and we would be better for it and the community would be better for it. And I think if we just started to acknowledge what it is that we're doing and why and we're more transparent and honest with people, they wouldn't they wouldn't feel like we were hiding something. You know, the reference to shell games. And so. Just trust. Trust people that they get it. They support and love this city the way you do. And yeah, there'll still be disagreement. Like, I'm a freaking counselor. I get it. You're not going to please everybody all the time. But I found that, you know, meeting them in a place where they need to be met and being honest with your responses goes a really long way and not trying to sort of obfuscate and obscure what the real motives are in certain situations. Yeah, or in all situations, actually. Thank you. Okay, Councilwoman Black. Thank you. I just wanted to say that I will be supporting this for three reasons. One. It's helping solve a drainage problem, too. It's cleaning up contaminated part of town. And three, it's creating an incredible 12 acre park, which is a huge amenity for the community. I've said it at every meeting. I regularly. Like run ride my. Bike on the Goldsmith Gulch trail, which is a drainage ditch that is I don't even know. How many. Miles it is. It goes all the way to Douglas County through beautiful parks in my district. The Harvard Gulch Trail, which is. In Councilman Cashman's district, but close to my house. I use it regularly. Beautiful opportunity to create a recreation space when we're solving a drainage issue. Also, the Highline Canal, which is not a drainage ditch, it's a different kind of ditch, but it was for a water conveyance and was turned into a recreational trail. And I'm telling you, that 12 acre park is going to be a great thing for that community. I think you can say in black and white New Year. Real quick. I guess I'm against this tonight because just the the situation, the way it was handled, you know, I got so little information today all at the last second, I had to find out what was going on. And then all of a sudden tonight, we get so much different information. And I don't know how serious how the public thinks that what you've said tonight helps them understand the situation. I don't think it does. I don't think a 200 page RFP is going to tell our citizens anything about what's going to go up. But those contaminated souls, I don't know what would seem is going to do to develop this this materials management plan that's going to help them. Is just seems to me is so different than the first ordinance that we did where, you know, I can understand that because city council will have another shot coming at it if something goes wrong here. We don't we approve this. And it's going to go ahead and and we'll hope for the best, especially when something is so sensitive. It's so much concern to our residents like this project compared to the the golf course project. I mean, it's just it's like night and day to me and to be treated so insensitively like this and and it to me, it's just sort of rude to the public. I just I just sort of agree with my colleagues about process. It's just it's not that I don't believe in storm drainage. I've voted for storm drains all the way along for the last two years, you know, but this is different to what way this was handled. And it's just sort of arrogant. And I just I just can't stand that kind of attitude that our city would have with our citizens. So all of I said, enough, and thank you, Mr. President. All right. Thank you, Councilman. I did want to say one other piece about green drainage that I'm excited that we're headed in that direction. And it's not just pipes that we're focusing on. In one of the city labs, they talked about drainage. They talked about learning from the Dutch. And I feel like in certain ways, we have especially with this with this project here, the other piece I want to say is I've had cancer and I have two kids who live two blocks away from this, and I'm very supportive of this project. Madam Secretary, roll call. Black eye. Clark Espinosa. No. Flynn, i. Herndon, i. Cashin. Can each new or. Ortega. I. Susman. I. Mr. President. I have three kids. I'm tired. I was going to ask you about that. My wife just reminded me very hard. Please close the. Voting. Announce the results at almost midnight. Eight days. Three days. Eight, eight, three nays. 1395 has passed. Thank you, everyone, for spending time. We stand adjourned.

AN ORDINANCE authorizing Seattle Parks and Recreation to enter into an agreement with Seattle Preparatory School to replace the Montlake Playfield and continue an ongoing relationship in the Montlake community consistent with the Non-Government Agreement in Attachment 1 to this ordinance.

SeattleCityCouncil_06282022_CB 120342

This will be Councilmember Lewis's legislation. Madam closely, please read item number two into the record. Agenda item two Council Bill 120. Excuse me, three or four to an ordinance authorizing Seattle Parks and Recreation to enter into an agreement with Seattle Repertory School to replace the Montlake playfield and continue an ongoing relationship in the Montlake community consistent with the non-government agreement and attachment one to the ordinance. Thank you. Let me. Councilmember Lewis, if you could just let me read something into the record and then I'll hand it over to you. The reconsideration of Council Bill 120342 is now before the Council. Council members at the June 24 City Council meeting, we considered Council Bill 120342. The bill did not secure the needed five votes to pass it and council member Alice moved to reconsider the bill. The motion carried in the Council Bill was held until this city council meeting. Until the city council meeting pursuant to the city charter. The Council will first consider the motion to reconsider. If the motion to reconsider is adopted, we will move to the passage of the bill as presented by the Public Assets and Homeless Committee. We now have before us a motion to reconsider the bill. Before I ask for a vote on whether or not the Council should open up this bill for discussion and another vote, are there any comments on the pending motion to reconsider the bill? Okay. Not seen any motion or any comments to reconsider the bill. The City Council will now vote to reconsider passage of Council Bill 120342. Will the clerk please call the roll? Councilmember Peterson. Yes. It's a member slot. So just to understand this is to reconsider the vote, not the bill itself. Right. Yes. Am I correct, Madam Clerk? Yes. Yes. Okay. Yes. Councilmember Strauss. Yes. Councilmember Herbold. S Councilmember. Lewis. Yes. Councilmember mosqueda. Councilmember Nelson. I thank the president whereas I seven in favor and unopposed. Thank you. The motion carries in Council Bill 120342 is before the council. Councilmember Lewis as a sponsor of this bill, the floor is yours. Thank you, council president suarez and thank you for that procedural overview as well. I'll keep my comments to the substance of the legislation. This legislation was reported out of the Public Assets and Homelessness Committee a couple of weeks ago as a two part departmental requested legislation to continue the arrangement between the Seattle Parks and Recreation Department and Seattle Crab, with the Montlake playfield located at Montlake Park in the Capitol Hill Montlake neighborhood. Just as a little bit of background a little over a decade ago. The precursor arrangement to this was that Seattle Prep would pay to replace a turf playing field at Montlake Playfield Park, and in return, Seattle Parks and Recreation would give exclusive access to that play field for a string of weeks in the spring and a spring of weeks in the fall, string of weeks in the fall for school related sports and activities. Otherwise, the space would be an open and programable public park in accordance with the standard rules and procedures for all other Seattle Public Park facilities. The turf field wore out after a decade of use and where Seattle Parks is proposing to go back and do this agreement again and have Seattle Prep replace the turf field in exchange for the same programmatic access that they've enjoyed over the past decade. The only material change in this deal to the one that was previously negotiated by Parks is that Seattle Prep will provide 50 hours of community based programing as part of the requirement for this arrangement. So it is a better deal for the city and for the public than the previous iteration of the deal. We did have a robust discussion about this legislation in committee and ultimately passed out of committee with four votes in favor and one abstention and. I don't have any other comments on the legislation, but I would encourage passage and that's just the only remarks I have. Council President. Thank you. Mr. Lewis, I'm going to open the floor to any of my colleagues that would like to address Councilor Lewis's bill, reconsider the bill itself. Cast member, so on. And then after that, we have Councilmember Herbold. Thank you, Councilor Brendan Morris. As I said last week when we were first discussing this bill, I'll be voting no on this contract. Our parks are treasured by the resources that should be available for all. This contract gives a private school exclusive access to the play field for a substantial part of the day, which unfortunately means that it will be unavailable during those hours by anyone else, such as students from Seattle Public Schools. New Astroturf on the play field is no doubt a real benefit. However, I do not think that outweighs losing public control of the space for so much of the day. So for that reason, I will be voting no. Thank you. Thank you, Councilor. Silent. Yes, Herbold. Thanks. I did vote in favor of this and in committee. I know. In the committee vote. I believe Kasper Morales abstained. I'm interested. I wasn't here at full council last week. I'm. I am interested to know what is what has transpired since last week. I believe there are some specific questions asked in the interim. And just I'm interested to know the sort of the substance of of the answers of the questions regarding the public benefit provided by parks, if anybody has that information. Before I move to you, Councilor Lewis, I want to see if there's anyone else, and then I'll move back to you to do concluding remarks. Would you like to respond now to Councilmember Herbert Council member Lewis? I can read some of the remarks that we received in response from Parks to Councilmember Morales as questions in the open session here today. I Campbell released before that. Can you share that. The date on that because I think we all received that that memo. Correct. Well, public. Yes. Yes. The entire council. Council president, as you indicate, was keyed on policy response to Councilmember Morales. Those questions. That email is dated Friday, June 24th. Thank you. And because there was a lot of public discussion at full council last week, I just think it's useful for the public record to hear what those responses were. I think Councilmember Lewis is going to do that. Yes. And Councilmember Herbold and council president, I am happy to summarize the response, the responses that we received from Parks. So just indulge me for a moment. I do have it available and in front of me. One of the questions raised by Councilmember Morales had been How many agreements do we have that offer reserved access for private entity entities in exchange for some level of investment in the parks? Seattle Parks and Recreation responded that the following principles are used to assess the viability of the private entity investments, which are namely determining determining project impact to neighboring communities and their uses of the field. Ensuring community field usage hours are maintained and are not reduced for the general public. Our community benefits from a higher quality field with with the investment. So weighing the benefit of the field against any potential lack of programing time consideration of the location of where the investment was going to be made. So, you know, what is the equity of how we're distributing these arrangements, whether Seattle Parks and Recreation is in a position to make their own investment in the site instead of a private partner, the size of the investment and the entity being able to provide public benefits, which as we establish is a bigger emphasis in the renegotiation of the deal. They then provide a list of the current standing arrangements that are similar to Montlake, including Montlake. So in addition to the Montlake arrangement, South Park Play Field with Seattle Academy in our base stadium with Seattle City University Bar as play fields with West Seattle Little League and the Magnuson Cricket Pitch with the Seattle Cricket Club. So five total arrangements across Seattle Parks and Recreation that have this kind of contract. But the and I won't go into the rest of the details. But if colleagues want to review, Parks did provide a significant amount of detail on all of those agreements and additions that they can review for the level of investment and public benefit that is detailed in the memo. The next question from Councilmember Morales was What analysis has been done on Seattle Park facilities to assess local neighborhood access for private school access? And Seattle Parks indicated they're currently conducting outreach to assess what each of the local neighborhoods desire for park play fields. And this is also sort of been a component of the Metropolitan Park District outreach that we're familiar from from that process. They track play field use through our use reports for known play field users. And very high utilizers of playing fields include public schools, private schools, youth organizations, adult rec leagues, Seattle Park, parks and Recreation, official recreation programs, and of course, just individual groups for private events. Seattle Public Schools have first priority scheduling rights through the Joint Use Agreement for all Seattle parks, which is a point that they that they note. But that is that excludes the facilities where there is a unique arrangement with a private partner. But again, that's only in a couple of scenarios Montlake, South South Park and the West Seattle Stadium. The final question, two questions from Councilmember Morales that were answered. How is the public benefit in this particular at the Montlake agreement calculated, and how are we measuring their success in providing a public benefit? And Parks responded that in the original agreement, Seattle Craft was not required to provide an explicit public benefit component. And the new proposal does enumerate, as I've indicated, a requirement of 50 additional public programing hours, which is a new component of the contract, and that is going to be tracked and recorded as part of the agreement upon entering into an agreement. This is the final question, Councilmember. I was asked upon entering into an agreement. What is the how do we essentially assess the the and understand the equitable benefit to the community? So so touching on the equity of these arrangements. And. This is broken into several sub questions. The first one is the community outreach to communities of color to receive scholarships and participate in sporting programs at the site. Parks responded that per the agreement, Seattle Prep will be reaching out to community centers around the city, as well as schools in less advantaged areas with specific offers to participate in this supplemental programing. Generally, registrations run through their website for on campus middle school camps, which is one of the things Seattle Prep is offering. Registration for lacrosse, speed and agility camps run offline to eliminate the barriers to entry or in-person recruitment. All fees for those camps will be waived for low income and disadvantaged youth. These camps are meant to serve as an opportunity to introduce new groups, new sports and spread fitness to underserved communities. The other subquestion in that category what are the statistics regarding applications and number of scholarships and participation? These public benefits will be tracked through an annual report, and the report requires Gallup to track participation numbers, hours of service provided volunteers, hours, number of programs provided, and the costs associated with all the public benefits. So there are articulable metrics in the agreement that are going to be tracked and reported on back to the Council as part of the agreement. Seattle Prep has operated programs in the past for the community at no cost, so there is a track record the organization has for this. So Parks doesn't anticipate compliance to be an issue. Seattle Prep run programs and events through the public benefit requirement will be free to the community, so there is no expectation of Seattle Prep charging for those services. And then the final subquestion was what in the past experience and methods of Seattle Prep in reaching out to youth within within those communities. So what is the track record of Seattle Prep as a partner in doing this work? And the past experiences have been in conjunction with the Montlake Community Center, the Seattle Nativity School, Northwest Child and other nonprofit groups that that are local to the Seattle Prep neighborhood. Seattle Prep has partnered with the Montlake Community Center in the past to provide student led tutoring services for children of low income and marginalized backgrounds. Taylor Prep has worked with Northwest Child to facilitate programs dedicated to supporting people with disabilities with recreational opportunities. So that is the summary of Seattle Parks responses. Again, councilmembers can review that memo that was provided last Friday. And the the attachment of the public benefits template and matrix that is attached to the legislation is a good reference point as well to provide a summary of the details of the contract. So thanks for indulging that that long recitation. Thank you. Councilman Lewis, is there any other comments? I just want to wrap up, I think, Councilor Lewis, that so formally as Chair Parks, we did completely redo the public benefits piece that you see that's reflected now in these new agreements. So I want to thank customers a lot and Councilmember Morales and will skate up for bringing some of these issues up. And thank you, Councilmember Herbold, for teen up some of these other issues. And thank you, Custer Lewis, for summarizing the memo that we'd all received. We did insert and make sure that Parks is has a robust race and social justice piece, that the public benefits piece is outweighs the private use of public benefits, that we track the progress and the success and the benefits in the use. And more importantly, as you shared, Councilmember Lewis, that we look at outreach not only to the communities but working with community centers in any other public asset that the private entity is using the public space for. So thank you for that. Okay. So not seeing anything else. Casper Lewis, do you want to say before we go to a vote? No council president. I'll rest on my previous remarks. Thank you. Well, the clerk please call the role on the passage of the bill. Let's remember. Peterson. Yes. Some members want. No. Council member. Strauss. Yes. Council member Herbold. Yes. Councilmember Lewis. Yes. Councilmember Nelson. I council president. Was. High six in favor. One opposed. Thank you, Madam Clerk. The bill passes. I will sign. The chair will signed it. I'm sorry. The chair will sign it. Will the clerk please affix my signature to the legislation on my behalf? Moving on to our agenda to agenda item three. I understand it's Councilmember Herbert's piece of legislation. Madam Clerk, will you please read item three into the record? Agenda item three Council Bill 120351 An ordinance relating to city employment amending sections 4.14.140 and 4.14.150 of the Seattle Municipal Code to expand eligibility for the moving expenses reimbursement benefit for

A bill for an Ordinance authorizing and approving an amendment to the St. Anthony Urban Redevelopment Plan to add the Sloans Block 7 West Project and to Create the Sloans Block 7 West Sales Tax Increment Area (FINANCE & SERVICES) Approves an amendment to the St. Anthony Urban Redevelopment Plan for the Sloans Block 7 West Project in Council District 1. The Committee approved filing this bill at its meeting on 12-16-14.

DenverCityCouncil_01202015_14-1099

I please close the voting and the results. 3939 1098 has been placed on final consideration and does pass. All right. We're moving on to our second public hearing on Council Bill 1099. Councilwoman Fox, would you please put 1099 on the floor? Certainly, Mr. President, I the council bill 1099 be placed upon final consideration and do pass. It has been moved and seconded. Public hearing for 1099 is now open. May we have the staff report? Hello again, Tracy Huggins with the Denver Urban Renewal Authority. Again, I beg your indulgence, as you will hear many of the same comments I made just a moment ago repeated here is this We do have to do a separate public hearing for each of these projects. So this project now is Sloan's BLOCK seven West, which we will be asking City Council to amend the urban redevelopment plan to include the Sloan's BLOCK Seven West Project, as well as to establish the Sloan's BLOCK seven West sales tax increment area. Again. The urban redevelopment area was established in August of 2013 and is comprised of approximately 32 acres generally bounded by Stewart Street on the west west Colfax Avenue on the South Perry Street on the East and West 17th Avenue on the North. The majority of the area was occupied by the Saint Anthony Central Hospital campus prior to its closure to support much of the redevelopment. Two of the of the hospital campus, two metropolitan districts are in place that will be used to finance a variety of infrastructure improvements. However, even with the use of the Metropolitan District financing, there was concern that the key objectives of the redevelopment plans could go unrealized without potential gap financing to support catalytic projects along West 17th Avenue and along West Colfax Avenue. In particular, the Colfax Parcel or BLOCK seven is challenged by difficulty in attracting new neighborhood serving retail to a largely blighted stretch of West Colfax and the anticipated extraordinary costs to support structured parking to meet the urban design objectives of Main Street zoning. Therefore, at the time the Urban Redevelopment Plan was originally approved, it also approved the creation of a property tax increment area that is coterminous with the Metropolitan District boundaries to support future projects. Any property tax increment generated within the property tax increment area can only be utilized on approved projects. The project being considered through an amendment to the Urban Redevelopment Plan is the redevelopment of the western portion of BLOCK Seven, located at West Colfax Avenue and Stewart Street. The Sloan's BLOCK seven West Project site is approximately 1.15 acres within the urban redevelopment area, and in conjunction with the Sloan's BLOCK Seven East Project will complete the redevelopment of BLOCK Seven. The project consists of a new 32,600 square foot Alamo Drafthouse Theater and approximately 26 surface parking spaces. The theater building will consist of eight screens, averaging approximately 100 seats per screen. The operator expects the theater to attract approximately 295,000 patrons annually. The site will benefit from the use of 145 stalls of structured parking through a permanent access easement agreement granted by the owner of the parking structure immediately north of the site. The redevelopment plan will help to activate a section along heavily trafficked West Colfax Avenue, bringing entertainment service and dining options to the diverse Denver community. The project will also act as the gateway to the fully redeveloped South Sloan's Lake area. The Urban Redevelopment Plan authorizes TURA to finance projects within the urban redevelopment area by the use of tax increment financing. The plan amendment will add the Sloan's BLOCK seven West sales tax increment area. Jurist staff has reviewed the budgets and proforma submitted by the developer and believes there is a financing gap in the project of $3,400,000. This financing gap will be addressed through sales and property tax increment generated by the redevelopment of the property as well as amounts from the broader property tax increment area. Following redevelopment, the site is anticipated to generate approximately $110,000 per year in net property tax increment and approximately $130,000 per year in net sales tax increment. These incremental tax revenues, as supplemented by additional area wide property tax increment of approximately $355,000 per year will be used to reimburse the developer for eligible expenses over a period not to exceed 25 years. In approving the Saint Anthony Urban Redevelopment Plan, City Council found the plan to be in conformance with the Denver Comprehensive Plan 2000 and its applicable supplements. Accordingly, any amendment to the Urban Redevelopment Plan must be in conformance with the Urban Redevelopment Plan objectives in order to maintain the continuing conformance with comp plan 2000. The general objectives of the Saint Anthony Urban Redevelopment Plan are to reduce or eliminate the blighted conditions and to stimulate the continued growth and development of the urban redevelopment area. The proposed project meets the following objectives of the Saint Anthony Urban Redevelopment Plan to eliminate the present and growing factors which contribute to the blight in the urban redevelopment area. To renew and improve the character and environment of the urban redevelopment area and its surroundings by preventing or ameliorating economic, physical and environmental deterioration. To encourage residential retail and commercial development and redevelopment that is socially and economically inclusive and from which the urban redevelopment area and its environs can draw economic strength to encourage and protect existing development within and immediately adjoining the urban renewal area. By creating conditions from which these areas can draw new economic strength to more effectively, use underdeveloped land within the urban redevelopment area to encourage land use patterns within the urban redevelopment area where pedestrians are safe and welcome to promote a diverse, sustainable neighborhood economy, including mixed use and commercial development opportunities within the urban redevelopment area. Again, there are a number of legislative findings that Council must make before approving this urban redevelopment plan amendment, including that the Sloan's Black Seven West Project is located within the Saint Anthony Urban Redevelopment Area and will promote the objectives set forth in the Saint Anthony Urban Redevelopment Plan that a feasible method exists for relocation of displaced individuals and families and business concerns. The project area contains no residences, therefore no individuals or families will be displaced. Additionally, due to the vacancy of the site, no business concerns will be displaced by the project. That written notice of this public hearing has been provided to all property owners, residents and owners of business concerns in the resolution setting this public hearing. City Council requested the Urban Renewal Authority to undertake this task. Written notice was mailed first class mail to all known property owners, residents and owners of business concerns in the Saint Anthony Urban Redevelopment Area on December 18th, 2014, which is at least 30 days prior to this public hearing. The statute requires that no more than 120 days have passed since the first public hearing before City Council on the Plan Amendment. Tonight is the first public hearing before Council on this Urban Redevelopment Plan Amendment. The statute also requires that two years must elapse before council can consider an urban redevelopment plan amendment if they previously failed to approve an urban redevelopment plan amendment for this project. This is the first consideration by City Council of an Urban Redevelopment Plan amendment for this project. Also, the plan amendment contains no property that was included in a previously submitted urban redevelopment plan amendment that was not approved by the City Council. As such, the requirement to wait at least 24 months since any prior public hearing is inapplicable. On December 3rd, 2014, the Denver Planning Board unanimously found that the proposed amendment to the St Anthony Urban Redevelopment Plan conforms to the Denver comprehensive plan and applicable supplements. A letter to this effect has been submitted as part of the record of this hearing and during request the City Council concur with that finding. The Saint Anthony Urban Redevelopment Plan, as amended by the proposed amendment, will afford maximum opportunity consistent with the sound needs of Denver as a whole for the readable rehabilitation or redevelopment of the Saint Anthony Urban Redevelopment Area by Private Enterprise. Alamo Sloan's LLC is a developer and a private development entity who intends to undertake the redevelopment project. This project will utilize property tax increment financing accordingly. Denver Public Schools District One has been permitted to participate in an advisory capacity with respect to the inclusion in the plan of the tax allocation provisions authorized by Section 31 Desk 25, 107 and nine of the Colorado Urban Renewal Law. And finally, the city and county of Denver can adequately finance and agreements are in place to finance any additional city and county of Denver infrastructure and services required to serve development within the Sloan's BLOCK Seven West Project area for the period during which the incremental taxes are paid to the authority. The plan allows for cooperative agreements between the city and borough to address additional infrastructure requirements in city services should they arise. In closing, again, we are very pleased to be working with the city to bring this project forward. A recent query of Google Maps revealed that except for several movie theaters that you would not take your children to. There are currently no movie theaters in Denver, west of I-25. This void is clearly recognized with the expected attendance of nearly 300,000 people to this venue. With the exciting redevelopment activities that are occurring in West Denver, the opportunity to fill a missing entertainment niche while also providing the type of catalytic project that was originally contemplated, is a win win for this neighborhood and the surrounding community. This loans block seven West Project, in conjunction with the Sloan's BLOCK Seven East Project, will help in the broader revitalization of this important corridor. We ask for your favorable consideration of this plan amendment and again will be able to answer any questions you may have. Thank you, Ms.. Huggins. We have three speakers for this public hearing, and I will call all three. You can make your way up to the front pew. Tom two franzia, jesselyn, chavez, zanny and sean. Okay, so you three can make your way into the front pew and Mr. de franzia, you can go ahead and begin your remarks . Thank you again for considering this amendment. Approving the amendment to the Urban Redevelopment Plan will allow for the construction of the Alamo Drafthouse Cinema and also for the redevelopment of the Office Building and construction of retail space. I believe true to the mission of Denver's economic plan, this project will be a driving force that advances economic prosperity . For this part of Denver by being. The catalyst that will. Revitalize the West Colfax Business corridor. The news that the Alamo Drafthouse Cinema will also be a part of Sloan's and West. Colfax has raised a tremendous amount of excitement in the neighborhood. We are confident that Alamo Drafthouse track record for success and pioneering projects in other challenged areas will be repeated in the West Colfax Business Corridor and surrounding neighborhoods. We're also confident that by anchoring the southern edge of the new Sloane's project, we will bring new customers for businesses currently operating on West Colfax and stimulate the development of abandoned lots and empty buildings. We are excited to create up to 150 new jobs in Act First Source Hiring and utilize small business enterprises in our construction. We're also excited to establish ourselves in the Sloane's community as business owners and operators offering film entertainment for an underserved area. The theater will be a great amenity for arts and entertainment, where guests can enjoy made to order food and Colorado microbrews served to the seats at affordable prices. Our signature programing, film festivals and free family films that run all summer long are a part of what has made Alamo Drafthouse successful. Just as integral to our success are the valuable services we provide to the communities in which we operate. The neighborhood surrounding Sloan's Lake and south of West Colfax have a longstanding history of diversity and community and Alamo Drafthouse Cinema intends to contribute to that. This next statement is taken directly from our guiding principles, which have been in place for many years in our posted in every one of our locations. And woven into the fabric of how we conduct our business. We're tied in. And by the way, everybody has a copy of all these principles as well. We're tied to the communities surrounding each location, and we do our part to make those communities better places to live. Our locations are unique, serving those neighborhoods in an organic, natural way. They share many similarities, but ultimately, each theater is unique to the community it serves. We enact this principle by being locally managed, hiring local staff, by listening to and engaging with the community around us and putting, as you said earlier, our money where our mouth is . When making commitments, for example, in 2014, the Alamo Drafthouse, Littleton hosted 47 discounted nonprofit events and school field trips for such groups as the Boys and Girls Club. Muscular Dystrophy Association Make a Hero Foundation Littleton Ballet Building Family Foundation. Bemis Library. Girl Scouts of Metro Denver. The School Hotel Echo. Miss to differentiate you 3 minutes is okay. I want to thank you again and thanks especially to Susan Sheppard for all her hard work that she's put towards this project. Thanks. Thank you, Mr. Diferencia. Jesselyn Chavez, R.D.. Good evening. My name is Jesselyn Charles, and I'm here on behalf of Girls Inc of Metro Denver. I'm excited to be here because we have been an organization that's been rooted in the West Colfax. Corridor for 32 years. We've been serving girls in that area for our entire history, so we're excited for something like the Alamo Drafthouse to come into our community. The girls that we serve are coming in from the neighborhoods and like was mentioned earlier, there is no there is nothing there for them to access like this. So for them to share and are, you know, wanting a safe out of school time, we're really excited to have that come. Alamo Drafthouse, now being placed in Littleton even still has had a great impact on the work that we do. They've been extremely generous and providing us with a number of resources in the past year. So we can't even imagine what would be available to us to have them here in our community when we're looking forward to what is coming in the next few months. Thanks. Thank you. Michelle Chavez. Trevisan. Shana Shea. Hi. I'm Shauna Sham, the executive director of the Building Family Foundation based in Littleton, Colorado. I am here to support the Alamo Drafthouse Cinema. Yes, it's a theater, but it's actually grown to quite more. It's a strategic partner, a strategic philanthropic partner and a great neighbor. They've been invaluable in supporting our mission of teaching life skills, employment skills. Soft skills, leadership skills to youth in the south metro area. There, and have been incredibly supportive of our youth film series and our summer film school. So in addition to a movie theater, you're going to be getting a great neighbor and incredible community partner. So I'm just really excited about this expansion and I know they'll have a great impact on on this area. So thank you for allowing us to speak. Thank you, Mr. Shame. That concludes our speakers. Time for questions of members of the Council. Councilwoman Ortega. I'd like to ask Tracy Huggins if she wouldn't mind coming to the microphone. So Tracey, for anybody that is watching who has not been involved in this process, can you explain why we have two separate tax increment districts for what may seem as one project to people looking at it from the outside? Certainly. And in fact, this came to us as one project initially for the entirety of the block, but there were a number of unique challenges with the type of development that was looking to occur that caused the development team to actually split it into two separate projects as such. Each of them have made a request for tax increment assistance through the Urban Redevelopment Authority, and we will be entering into discrete redevelopment agreements with each of those entities. So with Lyttleton Capital Partners as well as with the The Alamo, we are look, because each project is looking to generate its own increment to pay for its own level of expenses. That's why we're looking to have the two separate sales tax increment areas so that they each will be able to take that as a benefit that which they themselves create. In addition, as I said, they will be sharing in the broader property tax increment area that is being created throughout the balance of the site . But it really is because there are they are two separate projects with two separate re developers, each looking to benefit from the sales tax increment that they themselves generate. I'm not sure if you're the right person to answer a question about the parking. So both of these projects are proposing to use part of the parking in the garage that is still existing on the site. And so my question is what other parcels or properties that have already come forward are proposing to use that same garage ? I know, for example, the theater will probably be most highly utilized in the evening when the office building and other uses on the site may not be available. So that probably makes sense. But can you just talk about that for sure? The the other primary user of the parking garage will be new residential development that is occurring on what would be one, two, three, four, block five with the parking garage being on block six. So BLOCK five is currently under redevelopment of four new rental residential units. That will be the primary user of that, the balance of the parking garage. And that's the property that is to the north of the garage. That's under construction. To the. East. Of the garage. Okay. What would you like me to put on the map? That would be helpful. Let me see if I can do that. As I. As I say that. And I just click to. Show the only other user of the garage besides these two projects that we're reviewing tonight, the residential. And as. Far. As I know, I'm looking for two other nods in the audience. Yes. That it would be the the residential as well as in the commercial uses on block seven. Okay. So, Councilwoman Ortega, this is a obviously an older picture, but you can see where it says BLOCK. Six where the. Parking structure is located. Again, the topic of our conversation tonight is block seven. BLOCK five is the site that is currently under construction for the residential with the residential development. Okay. Thank you. I have no further questions. Thank you, Councilwoman Ortega. Councilman Rob. Well, that was a very serious question. My question is for the representative from Alamo free movies in the summer for kids and their parents. Absolutely. Every day, the summer when the kids are out on summer break prior to noon, we schedule a free family film where parents and kids can come and watch free in the theater. Okay. That was a commercial time for you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Kathryn Moran, Catwoman Fox, thank you. Also for Mr. de France here. They don't go far. It's interesting to find out about these free summer movies because one of the concerns I had followed a comment by the district councilwoman last week about the importance of having family friendly development in northwest Denver and around the Sloan's Lake. And when I did some research about the movie chain, I discovered that the admission and age policy, by and large not entirely, but by and large, was truly not designed for an area with children. The stated policy that I saw was age policy 18 and up. Children six and up will be allowed only with a parent or guardian. No children under age of six will be allowed. And then there was also reference in the Littleton one to the dinner package with a movie that restricted everybody to age 21. So I'm trying to figure out I mean, this may be is your way of balancing things, but it does not appear that this is a theater really designed for attracting children. Yeah, I could understand your concern by reading the policies. First of all, it's children under six are not permitted in a PG movie, a rated PG movie. Children under six are permitted with their parents. So so we don't completely shut them out. And secondly, Alamo Drafthouse is a family theater. We are not a theater where parents come and drop off their teenagers and drop off their kids to hang out and to loiter and to watch movies. We focus on the movie experience as being a family event, and we provide a nice text free talk, free environment in which families can watch movies together. And we focus on family programing. We play first run films, all the latest Hollywood Pixar movies and, you know, Family and children repertory titles. We play those as well with regards to our food and beverage service. Yes, we do serve alcohol and we do have a strict policy when serving food and alcohol to make sure that everybody in the theater is accompanied by an adult. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman. That's Councilwoman Sheppard. Thank you, Mr. President. I've been doing a lot of research on the West Colfax corridor, and I know that the rates of poverty are extremely high as well as unemployment. So Mr. De Franzia referenced the hundred and 50 jobs that he hopes to create on the site. And for those who may be watching or in the audience whose ears perked up at the opportunity for some jobs in the site. Tracy. Ms.. Huggins, I was hoping you can explain the first source hiring policy. I would be happy to. Thank you for asking me to do exactly that. So any project that receives tax increment assistance through the urban redevelopment, through the Urban Renewal Authority, is required to comply with our first source hiring policy, which is a program that is designed to allow for the first opportunity to interview for any job that is created as a result of the project to be made available to low income Denver residents. So we work very closely with the Denver Housing Authority, who then works with the developers first source project coordinator to make sure that all of those job postings. Are are. Known and made available again from a first opportunity standpoint to low income Denver residents. Thank you. All right. Do we have any other questions for 1099? Seen none. Public hearing on 299 is not closed. Time for comments, Councilwoman Sheppard. Thank you, Mr. President. So we were talking earlier about how blighted the West Colfax corridor and how the condition of that street has been such for about 50 to 60 years. And currently on that street and I've spent a lot of time on that street, there is an incredible plethora of boarded up, abandoned buildings, vacant parking lots , payday lenders, tattoo parlors, more used car lots than you can shake a stick at. I don't know how many used cars one can buy in a year and a bunch of Route 66 era motels that definitely have seen better days. This, I believe, will be an exciting opportunity to revitalize this court. I'm very excited about this project. I know that. And Councilman Lopez and I talk about this a lot in north and west Denver, we lose so much of our tax dollars to shopping opportunities and Jeffco entertainment opportunities in Jeffco and other services, because so many of our residents travel to Jefferson County, to the Belmar area to receive things that we really want to see happening in Denver. I know that the few times I've gone to a movie when I have time, which is really rare, I've also driven to Belmar. So I'm excited about this opportunity because I think this gives a great, great chance for people who already live in our neighborhood to to to dine and have a craft beer and a scratch made meal and enjoy a great movie right in our neighborhood. And I can actually walk to this place I'm pretty excited about that might be a bit of a long walk, but I could walk. So I'm very excited about that. I'm excited about the fact that it's well-served by public transportation, such as the West Colfax Bus and also our new West Corridor light rail. And I am excited that yet another vacated lot, which is currently kind of a weeded out parking lot, will have the opportunity to be redeveloped into something that is really something that we can all be proud of. And I've had the opportunity to get to know the good folks from Alamo over the last year and have interacted with them as well as some of the nonprofits in our area. And, you know, thank you for already hosting a wonderful, very family oriented outdoor summer movie on the shores of Sloan's Lake last year. I can't remember the name of it, but it's pretty funny. And and to donate some of the proceeds from the sales of the concessions to one of our area nonprofits, and I know you've also already had some conversations with various community partners about what types of film festivals you might want to sponsor at that location. So I am excited about the revitalization opportunity. I'm excited about doing something for, you know, a really underutilized, blighted area on West Colfax quarter. I'm excited about the opportunity for some new jobs and and I'm excited about the way that you partner with the community. So I am very happy to support this tonight, and I would urge my colleagues to do so as well. Thank you, Councilwoman Shepherd. Councilwoman Fox. Thank you, Mr. President. Just perfunctorily, I'm making the motions tonight, and I made the motion on this particular ordinance, but it is not something I personally support in committee. I asked whether the Littleton Alamo Drafthouse had received TIFF money, the tax increment financing money, and the answer was no. It was explained to me that it was a different business model. I've long said I support tax increment financing in some cases, but each proposal has to stand on its own merits. It is not, in my opinion, the taxpayer's responsibility to subsidize a movie theater and drafthouse. I do want to thank Dora for making all the information about their proposals accessible to me. To its credit, much of the of this Saint Anthony redevelopment does not require TIFF money, and I think that's very important. I was pleased for that. I'm also pleased that they were willing to let me take a peek at something very important to me. I've looked at the confidential financials for Alamo, and if projections are right long term, I believe this endeavor can make it without taxpayer subsidies. And so I'll be voting against this TIFF proposal. Thank you, Councilwoman Fides. Councilman Lopez. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think a lot of what. Councilman Sheppard. Had expressed the same sentiments that I have along West Colfax. I think this is one of the first developments that are going to pop up that's really going to spur activity along West Colfax. Those of you who are familiar with the west side of the city, in the west side of the river, there's not much development out there. And, you know, Councilman is right and Councilman Shepard's right. You know, we do not have very many areas. We do not see blight and you do not see weeds growing instead of landscaped. Right. Always. You know, it's it's a good thing to see this happen. This neighborhood needs it. The it's not just about jobs. It's not just about economic development, but it's also about folks getting a return on their investment when they go to the bank and borrow against their home to send a kid. College should be worth something, right? They should have some equity, right? Folks on the west side of Denver should be able to have capital as well. Right. And that's what developments help do and that's what it helps spur. And I think this is one of those examples. It's long overdue. You know, West Colfax, you know, although you do have the the the old school motel motels, it does have that Route 66 flavor. That's where we that's not where I did. But I cruised federal back in the day. But before that, it was cool facts and you still have that. And we have to remember that in Denver that, yes, you have an East and West Colfax and whether it is certain amenities, you know, that come from the city that we are able to take care of on our own or things that we have to leverage active financing to make it happen, it's there. And, you know, my hat's off to the Alamo. You know, they came to us very early on to the community, actually. And at first, we were kind of a little weirded out because, you know, you cannot you can't bring in the name like the Alamo to a highly Chicano neighborhood. Man, that's a bad name, right? And so they said, no, no, no, no, no, it doesn't have anything to do with the Alamo. And I said it means tree, right? Poplar tree? Absolutely. Exactly. And so hopefully there's a lot of trees on that site, but it is going to help spur that that development. And, you know, it may not be one of those Elvis theaters that I went to as a kid over in southwest Denver. You drop you off, get in a fight, you know, come back home, pay it all. But you're laughing because you know it's true. But it is meeting a need in that area town. I like Bill Maher, but I wish Bill Maher was in Denver. Because if I had a choice. Nothing against Lakewood. Love Lakewood. It's nice Home Depot's down the street, but I'd rather go to the one in Denver. Why? Because it's important to invest in your own neighborhoods and in your own city. Because of the youths are our youth are going to be employed. There's a lot of folks that are going to be employed there. It's our side of the city and we need to invest in it. And so, you know, I would love to see development happen there that would keep people and keep dollars in Denver instead of taking it out. So, Councilman, this is going to be awesome and I do support this from moving forward. Thank you, Councilman Lopez. Councilwoman Robb. Thank you, Mr. President. Since Councilman Lopez mentioned East Colfax, thank you for reminding me there's a West End in East Colfax. I would like to just point out, I know it's not my colleague, Councilwoman Ford's favorite project, but all evening, as I've listened to this, I've been thinking about the Lowenstein Theater, a site that was vacant for 20 years on Colfax. And we've struggled. It was it was hard to redevelop. It was financially hard to redevelop. But just to give you an example, the key word to me in this proposal tonight in front of us is the word catalyst. That's the only TIFF project funding we did along Colfax. And since then, we've had two new grocery stores on East Colfax, a new Office Depot, a new liquor store, no tax increment in the liquor store. Many new businesses, including Stella, a restaurant that I think maybe came from that, the West, Northwest, Tiki Monk, Sassafras, also opening along Colfax. I could really go on in a very long list. So this is a hard site. We have people who came in willing to do the clean up, the planning, a lot of the entitlement work. But the risk of having this site sit vacant is a huge risk because of what else is on East Colfax. I will be supporting this tonight. Excuse me, what else is on West Colfax? Thank you, Councilwoman Robb. Councilwoman Ortega. Thank you, Mr. President. I just wanted to add my $0.02 here as well. I actually grew up in my high school years to the neighborhood just south of this. And it's been that long since we had not seen the kind of investment on the West Colfax corridor. I remember Councilman Garcia when he was the councilman of that area, working really hard to begin to see some revitalization of the West Colfax corridor. And Councilman Councilwoman Robb used the word catalyst. I was going to use the word anchor anchor tenant and that's what I see. The Alamo. As for the Colfax corridor, I sit on the board of a nonprofit that did the housing Colfax in Irving, and we've seen the city invest in that, as well as the new library that will soon be opening. We heard maybe sometime in February, the end of February. They also invested in the project at the West End, done by the Colorado Coalition for the Homeless. So as we see the need for affordable housing in our city, we've seen some city investment in that. And we will see both market rate and some affordable housing as part of this St Anthony's redevelopment site. But all of that is bringing even more more bodies, more synergy to the community, as well as all of the residents that live both north and south of Colfax. I'm excited about having this theater on Colfax because it's a missing link for our community and the other type of investment that will be made, bringing in more restaurants and other things that I think will continue to help spur other investment along the West Colfax corridor. We've seen some of that happening with some city assistance. I think this project will help us see some of that happening just with private investment that will want to come and be part of this corridor. So I am happy to support both of these bills tonight. Thank you. Thank you. Councilwoman Ortega, any other comments? 1099 Scene on Madam Secretary, Roll call. SHEPHERD Hi, Susman. Brooks Hi. Brown I know. And each. Lehman Hi. Lopez Hi, Monteiro. Nevitt Hi, Ortega. Rob. All right, Mr. President. Hi. Secretary, please. Those are the only announced results. 12. One day, 12 eyes. One day. 1099 has been placed on final consideration and does pass council. We need we now need to vote on Council Bill 1100, which will reach the panel bill that we postponed. Councilwoman Fox, would you please put council bill 1100 on the floor? Thank you, Mr. President. I move that council bill 1100 be placed upon final consideration and do pass. It has been moved. We need a second. It's been moved and seconded. Comments. Councilwoman Fox. This is a companion bill and since I didn't support the main one, I'm not going to be supporting this money. Thank you, Councilwoman Fox. Councilman Shepherd, did you want to show? No further. Comment. All right. Thank you. In other comments on 1100, seen none. Madam Secretary. Roll Call. Shepherd Susman. Brooks Brown. Fox. No. Kenny Layman. Lopez. Monteiro, Nevitt. Ortega, Rob. All right, Mr. President. I. Madam Secretary, please close the vote and announce the results. 1201 Nay Baba has won the council bill 1100 has been placed on final consideration and does pass. All right. We are moving on to the next one, which is Council Bill 1047.

Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code by adding Chapter 8.97 relating to Tenant Relocation Assistance, read and adopted as read. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_06112019_19-0502

All right, let's go. Okay, we're going to do one more item then public, then the public comment. So let me go back up to. Which is the other one I got pulled. Okay, Adam. 43, the second reading of the tenant relocation. Communication from city attorney recommendation or declare ordinance amending the Long Beach Municipal Code relating to tenant relocation assistance red and adopted as red citywide. This is the second reading. There's a motion and a second is the public comment on this item. Seeing. Not in the public eye. Please come forward. Oh, yeah. Please come forward. Is there any other. I'm going to close the speakers list. And anybody else. Now is the time we're trying to move. We've still got a full agenda, so please, we can be brief. That would be great. This is the second reading. Please hold on 1/2. Okay, I'm closing the speaker's list. And it's closed. It's fine. You're in line. Guys, is everyone in line for this item? This is the second reading. So I think we've we've let's be. Yeah, I get that. So let's go ahead and begin, please. My name Jeanette. And actually, I'm sorry. We're going to go down in 90 seconds. Please begin. My name's Natalie Shaw. I there's a six unit building I live in, and three units have been thrown out. And a new owner came in, and they did not give us two option to pay more rent. They just have evicted us. And you're doing it on July 25th, so we would not be covered by the August 1st bill. And we all might be homeless for a while until we can save some money to get first and last month's rent. And I just wanted to say that this item 43 is very important, and I do hope it does pass. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next item, please. And before Mr. Fox goes, we have closed the speakers list. So the gentleman in the back is our last speaker. Nope. Actually, this not just. Yeah. Behind Jordan? Yep. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening, Mayor and City Council. I'm here for the second reading of this ordinance. I remember that they said that there was going to be some tweaking to this ordinance last time we were here. Did that get accomplished? Rex Richardson brought it on the floor that we could adjust certain things. I haven't heard anything back about any kind of a adjustment to the ordinance as read. I'd like to have an answer for that if possible. My concern on this ordinance, frankly, is for tenants, not for landlords, particularly the more stringent we make any kind of . Contract between landlords and tenants. The more stringent the landlords will be in selecting tenants. Right now we do favors for people and say, Oh, you have a 505 score, we'll let you rent anyway. We don't care. You're a nice person, but if it becomes too onerous with relocation costs, not based on the 10% thing which the state already said, but don't just cause eviction, it may make it difficult for people to get an apartment because the standard will be so high. And so I think there's always consequences to what we do, and I hope that we will. You know, if you are going to pass this ordinance that in the future we look at that and see come back to it maybe in a year to figure out if we can amend the ordinance, as Miss Price had wanted to do. And Darryl Supernanny and I thank you so much for your time today. I just wanted to make that a little speech for you. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Fox. And also, I know there's there's some other folks that are kind of, I think, having some conversations in the in the gallery. So, please, if you have to chat, please go outside. I want to get through our public comment. Yes, sir. Council Mayor Chuck Brewer. I am here to say that since the conversation of this ordinance had come into place, I have seen rents already go up and it's hurting. The tenant. This ordinance will eventually hurt the tenant. I've also seen investors who are excited about the city. Talk about leaving the city. We've seen this before. We've seen it in. In our businesses. As Toyota has left the state, we're right now. The hot area to buy in is not California. Well, you know, when you go up there, let them know that we're seeing businesses leave. We're seeing people leave and people who want to invest in the state leave. Delaware statue trusts are one of the way it goes. So when toilets need to be correctly cleared, windows need to be fixed, and there's damage to buildings. And a landlord can't make a decent profit to do this because of ordinance of rent control like this, it will eventually hurt the tenant and our city. Our city deserves better. I think there's unforeseen consequences and we see it in our city just like we see potholes. We thought we couldn't fix the city, let the potholes go. Well, the same thing is going to be with the tenants and the landlords. Thank you for making the next speaker, please. Good evening. Mayor Robert Garcia and council members. I'm sorry, knew it. This is like it my third or fourth time. But I'm I get like to the point because I'm very, very active with this. 43 lieutenant relocations is that I am for this because if this doesn't pass, how can you have people relocate and then they don't have the money to relocate? Because the you know, the housing is really, really high. I mean, Long Beach, affordable housing. They have Section eight. They have Long Beach affordable housing as well, a sliding scale. But some management companies, they don't have that. So my my I hope this you will understand that instead of doing something to reduce homelessness, this is going to create homelessness. And it's big enough as it is. We want to do better in our city. And I hope that this passes because another thing is also the risk, not only the rent control is high, but also minimum wage. You know, as soon as minimum wage goes up, then next thing you know, then the rent goes up and then everything else in the grocery stores goes up. I mean, I remember once upon a time when you could buy a can of Campbell's soup for a dollars a 40 something says now it's almost $5. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Good evening, councilmembers and Mayor. My name is Maria. I'm a proud de one resident. Ten years. Thank you, Lina, for serving undocumented, unafraid and unapologetic. And I'm also the community organizer, director of community organizer for housing Long Beach. I would first and foremost like to thank everyone who has put work into this in getting this ordinance. It has been a long journey for us at Housing Long Beach. In 2016, we advocated for a responsible renters ordinance which mirrored just cause. In 2018, we pulled papers for rent control and stirred up the whole city. We are ready for this policy. We look forward to working alongside you all, alongside landlords and alongside all our beautiful community members. Again, before I leave. When renters rise, cities thrive. Thank you. Thank you very much, Nick Speaker, please. Good evening, honorable mayor and council members. My name is Ailsa Tong with Long Beach Forward. I just want to thank you so, so much for your leadership in putting this ordinance forward. This ordinance will help prevent homelessness. Period. Full stop. We are working Long Beach Forward is working. Proud to work alongside our partners housing Long Beach and Libra. And we also urge you to make the critical fixes that we did discuss in the last round, especially to ensure that tenants do receive their relocation assistance before they are required to move. But in any case, thank you so much, Mayor and City Council, for your leadership on this critical ordinance. Thank you. Next week for please. Good evening, Mayor. Council and staff. My name's Peter Madsen. I'm in the third district and I am with Long Beach. Residents Empowered. It's great to see such a critical policy being treated with the urgency that reflects the urgency of the housing crisis that we're facing in Long Beach, that families, seniors, disabled folks are all facing here in Long Beach. I'm eager to see this policy and other policies continue to be strengthened to better protect the renters that make Long Beach the diverse and vibrant city that we always love to talk about. I've heard that word thrown out a lot tonight, and I love my city, too. I grew up here and want to see it protected and I want to be able to continue living here myself. I think. Yeah, it's great that we got the. Urgency to reflect that crisis and I think to make it stronger, we got to make sure that these tenants get the money before they move out so they can actually use that money to get the next place they're going to live instead of winding up without a home. That's kind of the really what the spirit of this policy is supposed to get at. And I hope we can I hope we don't forget to prioritize that additional source of funding that we want to find to provide the extra relocation amount to seniors and disabled renters. Um, I hope this remains a priority because these are some of the most vulnerable to displacement and have the least amount of safety nets. So thank you for your time. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Hi there. My name is Jordan. When I'm a resident of the seventh District as a tenant, I like to speak for myself and as attendants rights advocate, I've been empowering other tenants to speak for themselves as well. So I speak for myself and hopefully I speak for other tenants in that we're really thankful to everybody on the council and on the staff that has helped push this forward and get this tenant relocation policy passed, something that we've been waiting for for a long time. And it's the first step in fantastic housing policy. From here, we have more work to do. I really hope that council members see this as a call to action for future action, especially advocating for affordable and supportive housing services that we need throughout our city. It's just as important to build as it is to have comprehensive rent stabilization and renter protection policies in good city planning. So once again, thank you so much for bringing this forward and I really encourage you pass this tonight. Thanks so much. Thank you very much. And our last speaker. Good evening. Council Mayor Garcia, I mean, I'm not sure why I'm here because you guys have already decided to push this through. So it's kind of I think the people that watch this on TV need to know that everything's already decided before we hit this council chamber. So congratulations housing Long Beach, because you already made it happen. But the truth is, yeah, congratulations. But you know what? The real loser is going to be the tenants, because they're the ones going to lose their housing. And you guys can take the blame for it because they're going to lose their housing because you push policy that isn't going to keep you in your homes. So you guys should think again. When you push policy like this, it's bad for the tenants. Rent controlled cities have the highest rent in the nation. So I mean, I'll benefit as a property owner because now I can push my rent really high now because I'm going to need to because of the policies you're pushing. So, hey, think about it. Santa monica rent control, highest rent in the nation, San Francisco rent control, high rent, New York rent control. So you're pushing policy that's going to raise rents. You're going to put it on the backs of the property owners. You're going to have a lot of small property owners lose their housing. You're going to lose your housing when the property owners lose their buildings. So think about it, because as you grow your political future, you're harming a lot of people. You're harming a lot of people, and you're making it look like you're helping them, but you're hurting them. You're going to hurt a lot of people. Like in Santa monica, 30% of the Latin population was vacated out when they implemented Erika Charles So think about that. Housing Long Beach. Goodnight. Goodnight. That concludes public comment. So we have a motion in a second on the motion. Councilor Pearce. Anything? Nope. Country Ranga? Nope. Councilman Austin. Thank you. And I will be voting in support of this second reading. I want to thank public comment. I do want to just reiterate that this was. This issue was was widely. Discussed by the council. I think it was acknowledged that this is an imperfect. Policy and that it still needs work. And I look forward to working to make it a more and even better. Policy that protects tenants and and gives them flexibility. So look forward. To that discussion very soon. Figure Councilman Councilman Price. Thank you. I want to support the advocates who have come out on both sides of this issue. I will be voting against the item tonight consistent with what I have shared in the past regarding my concern with the just cause eviction portion. The rest of it I'm okay with, but I don't like the just cause eviction portion of it. And I look forward to bringing this item back or having somebody bring it back so that we can make those modifications, which I do believe is in the works. And I will happily and proudly support the modifications made at that time. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Councilmember Supernova. Thank you. Thanks to the speakers here tonight. I have a couple of questions of staff. One involves education and the other involves data analysis. Can staff explain what kind of outreach or training we're doing or plan to do in the future? And the dilemma we have is calls to our council office. Both from tenants and from landlords, wanting the policy explained. Do we have budgeting here to conduct that. Or what is. The plan moving forward? Yes, Councilmember I'll have Linda Tatum and Patrick Harris answer those questions. And yes, we're planning on a very robust outreach campaign. And just to elaborate further, the outreach campaign will involve direct contact with the property owners, as well as the residents using the business license address list, because landlords are required if they have four units or more, to get a business license. Using that as a primary tool, we will be able to identify the very specifically the landlords. And. Provide them with some of the material that was specifically called out in the ordinance regarding information that they'll need to transfer to the tenants. But in addition to that, we have a number of other outreach sources, such as providing information on the city's website, on social media. We'll have a fairly robust outreach effort, and we're I'm happy to share that in a little bit more detail with the city council in a24 from memo to. So you'll have a better idea of that going forward. That, frankly, was one of the reasons we asked for additional time just to allow staff to pull together those resources to make sure that we make a very concerted effort to get the word out to landlords and to the tenants. Okay. Thank you, Will. Appreciate that, too, from four Memo. And we'll if there's something you'd like to do in the interim. Or if would you like to us to communicate our office, to communicate that we'll be waiting for this policy to. Come forward? I'm sorry, could you repeat we're getting questions daily about the Policy Council. Should I sell my units now or whatnot? So the response is we will have those answers. Forthcoming at a certain. Point. Yes. And you can also feel free to direct them to the Development Services Department. We're happy to respond to those questions on a one on one basis. Okay, great. Thank you. My other question is on data analysis and what type of data we have in terms of the number of people impacted. And I'm not sure if much of this was data driven, but do we know how many people have how many landlords have raised rent? So, for instance, I think we know the number for Plex's in the city. The number I have is 2829, if that sounds about right, do you know how many sold in the last year? Would staff know that? Unfortunately, Councilman, we don't have that that kind of data available to us. Okay. So I think. That number is 97 have sold. So my question would be, I wonder if. We're going to at a certain. Point either benchmark where. We are now in terms of how many rents have been raised of that 97, where the. Apartment houses have changed ownership. I just think we either need a benchmarking exercise for where we are so we can track this ordinance as we move forward. So that'd be my request. Thank you. Agreed. And we can certainly accommodate that. That was one of the purposes of the program so that as we get payments made out under the provisions of this, we would have some data that we could start tracking and report back to the to the council. Okay. Thank you, Director. I think we're on the same page. I just wanted to bring it up for the. Public so there's no thank you. Thank you, Councilmember. And finally, Councilman, can. Oscar. I just want to say thank you to our all of the housing advocates. We started this about a year and a half, almost two years ago. Of course, it's gone beyond. And now in my last final meeting, I'm really, really proud of this this ordinance. And I'm looking forward for this to carry through and to really be supportive of of our residents that need it the most. So thank you very much for all of your work. Thank you. And this is this is the the main motion, which is to approve the ordinance. Second reading, please cast your votes. Motion carries. Okay. Thank you. That concludes that ordinance. We are now going back to the agenda where next up item is going to be 32 and 33. I do want to I do have the public comment that I want to get through here.

Recommendation to declare ordinance making findings and determinations regarding contracting for work usually performed by City employees and authorizing City Manager to enter a contract with Plenary Edgemoor Civic Partners, LLC, for custodial, maintenance and security services, read and adopted as read. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_04192016_15-1313

Thank you. It's an emotion and a second. Members, cast your vote. Motion carries. Thank you. Item 30 Report from Economic and Property Development, Development Services, Financial Management, Library Services, Parks, Recreation and Marine and Public Works. Recommendation to declare ordnance making findings and determinations regarding contracting for work usually performed by city employees and authorizing the city manager to enter a contract with Plenary Edge. More civic partners for custodial maintenance and Security Services read and adopted as read citywide. Mr. Modica. Staff report. Vice Mayor, members of the council, this is for you. Tonight is the second reading of the Prop l ordinance relating to the new Civic Center. So it includes the changes as made at the original reading, and it was delayed in coming back to you as the negotiations had continued with the IAM. And so it is before you tonight as this is the last council date prior to the deadline. Thank you. Councilman Price. I have no comment on this. Councilman Austin. I'd like to hear public comment. Sure. Is there any member of the public that wish to address the Council on item 30? Please come forward. State your name. Good evening. Members of the council, Richard Suarez representing the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers. This evening, the city manager asks you to violate the MBA, the Myers Melius Brown Act. The IAM has a simple request that the Council does not break the law. And item 30 of the agenda. The city manager recommends that the council approve the property ordinance and execute a project agreement. The City Council must refuse to do this because it is illegal. The parties have not concluded bargaining over the contracting out of I am representative bargaining unit work relative to the Civic Center project. Indeed, the parties just completed a fact finding hearing last Friday on April 15th. And the fact finder will issue his report no later than May 6th of 2016. The AM is hopeful that the Fact Finders Report will provide critical assistance in bringing the parties to a mutually agreeable resolution of the Civic Center project. Contracting out the council should not terminate bargaining before the Fact Finders report is issued. In addition, under section 30 505.7 of the Government Code, the Council must hold a hearing on the Fact Finders report before it can implement the city's last best than final offer. Accordingly, if the city council takes action recommended in Agenda Number 30, the city will violate the MBA. The AM therefore demands that the city remove item 30 from today's City Council agenda. Furthermore, it must be pointed out that the proposal study is flawed. It is not cheaper to contract out. The report has intentionally inflated the cost of city provided services to make chases bid seem cheaper. The Council should order an objective, fair, properly study to be prepared. We've met several times over this issue and when we were at an impasse, we followed the law and the law said we go to a fact finder, which for all intents and purposes is a neutral. And this individual last Friday heard. For me, and it heard from the folks representing the city's position. As most times when a neutral is involved, he or she is afforded a certain reasonable amount of time to render a decision. This is the process. Invoking this agreement today violates that process. So we are simply asking that we continue the process and see what the fact finder has to say. And then based on that. The charter, I believe, based on the information that has been given to me, allows you, the council, to then take a vote on that decision. That's all we're asking you to do. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Very good. You see, Jess, just so I understand it, what we're talking about is maintenance. And the building that is going to drive us, everybody realizes we'll drive as further down the road to bankruptcy is. That's what we're talking about, right? So taking a few more weeks to study it. Really? He's not going to. Impacted. It may, hopefully. Slow us down that road to bankruptcy. So I would suggest. Stepping back. Listening to what was just. Imparted to by certainly one more knowledgeable on the subject than me. I don't know what the hurry is to. Go down that path of bankruptcy. But give it some thought, please. Thank you, Councilman Austin. It's just a really quick question for our staff regarding the bargaining process. How many bargaining sessions do we have on this particular matter with the. I believe we've had in excess of 12. And since when? Since I think we originally started the prop l process and the request for bargaining back in September, I believe, of 2014 2015. We did negotiations and meet and confer in December all the way through and through the last several months. Okay. And in terms of the mentioned fact finding, why were we, in fact finding. There is a provision in state law that once you reach impasse, there is the ability to go to a fact finding process. So can you explain to the public listening what impact path actually means? Sure. For that level of specificity, I'll have Alex Vasquez give a overview of the fact finding process. So essentially the fact finding process involves fact finding a panel, a neutral, a representative by the union and represented by city. Each side presents their case and the decision comes back before the council to take into consideration. So. So impasse means that after 12 bargaining sessions, we weren't able to reach an agreement? That's correct. Mr. Modica, is there any sort of financial implications toward regarding this particular entering into this agreement? There are. And I'd also like to add a little bit of history is we originally had some bargaining sessions or some meet and confer prior to the vote to get council direction to it, to move forward December 15th. We actually then took additional time to go back to the table and to do additional negotiations and did that throughout January, end of February before reaching impasse. We did notify our partners the IAM that on on January 28 that we had a hard deadline in order to, you know, that we had to make a decision at the end of April in order to keep forward and keep the pricing that we had secured for this project. Otherwise it would be a significant increase in price. And we had we also implemented what was called an early works agreement in order to secure additional time to try to reach agreement. So given all those factors, we do expect, A, that if we do not close by the end of this year and, you know, by the end of April that there will be significant increases in price in terms of interest rate fluctuation. And the contract that we have with our partner will. And a significant increase in cost for a civic center does not serve anybody's interest. Our city employees or the city or the taxpayers of the city of Long Beach at all. I do want to just raise my concern, and I think I raised it here several months ago when we were talking about moving forward with the Civic Center Project Project and particularly the the operations and maintenance component of this regarding a number of city employees who were subject to potentially being displaced. And I think the city council made a a I think most of us made it made it very clear that we did not want to see any of our city employees, existing city employees, lose their jobs as a result of this. Was that communicated at the bargaining table? Yes, absolutely. And if I may add, Councilmember Section four of the Prop L finding this evening states that city employees who whole classifications identified in the Appendix C of the Prop L study who are assigned to the Civic Center facility, shall not be reduced in our position, duties or compensation as a result of the execution of this contract. So we have a very firm commitment. Not only did through this process, we add back in the security officers, which were originally contemplated in the prop l, but that was the council decided to keep the security officers in the building. That's included in tonight's action, as well as that commitment that none of the affected employees and I believe there are eight would would be impacted in any way. They would absolutely have a job with the city. All right. Thank you. Councilman Gonzalez. Yes. Thank you. I think my question was Councilmember L Austin's last question. I just wanted to reiterate the fact that no employees currently will be reduced in hours, positions, duties, etc., in this realm. I know we had a few facilities maintenance employees who came to my office directly and who weren't hearing information from any side. And so I understand that there's negotiations going on, but, you know, this is their livelihood. So I want to make sure that this is, you know, addressed. And I see that here. So thank you for answering the question. I appreciate it. Councilwoman Price. Thank you. I want to follow up on some comments that were made by Mr. Suarez regarding legal procedures and aspects. It's my understanding, based on the item, as I as I've read it and reviewed it, that the recommendation by staff is to move forward tonight. And that's based on input from the city attorney, is that correct? Vice Members of Counsel That is correct. The firm has created an exception to the requirement of exhausting the fact finding process, and we discussed that within the bargaining unit with the city under operational necessity. And I think some of the comments made by the Assistant City Manager and our communications to the AM regarding the hard date and the fixed deadlines and the consequences of missing that date, meet the requirement of the operational necessity. And what are some of the consequences associated with the city missing that date? Some of those would include and I'll let somebody else maybe answer that has more. But a fixed price proposal would expire. The city would need to renegotiate the proposal and significant possible increases in the cost. The city could incur termination penalties and lose the value of the moneys expended. Regarding the design. It jeopardizes the project due to the fiscal constraints and all that. Mr. Conway. I think in addition to the financial impacts relative to a delay. To a project, there is also. The, I think, safety impacts in delaying the. Project as well. This is our fastest process to. Bringing a safe facility to the city. For its staff and its visitors. And any delay to that process. I think exposes us to potential liability. Great. Thank you. Thank you. There's been a motion and a second. Members, please cast your vote. Motion carries. Thank you. When a new business we have item 31 communication from Councilman Andrews, Councilwoman Price and councilmember super non recommendation to direct the city manager to support Senate Concurrent Resolution one or two, which would name the Los Alamitos Bay Bridge or any

Recommendation to declare ordinance amending Ordinance No. ORD-06-0037, modifying the assessments to be levied with the Bixby Knolls Parking and Business Improvement Area, read and adopted as read. (Districts 7,8)

LongBeachCC_10212014_14-0866

Thank you, Mayor. First item involves the Bixby Knolls Parking and business improvement area, and it's a recommendation to authorize to receive supporting documentation to the record. Conclude the hearing and authorize the city manager to extend an agreement with the association for one year. And declared an ordinance approving the Bixby Knolls Parking and Business Improvement Area Program. Continued assessment for a period of October 1st, 2014 to September 30th, 2015. Thank you, Mr. West. My comment is going to make this presentation. Mayor Garcia, members of the City Council, this item relates to the continuation of the Bixby Knolls Parking and Business Improvement Area Program and assessment for an additional year. The assessment was raised this year to cover the loss of funding from the former RDA and to reinstitute CPI increases which have not been implemented since 1995. These increases are necessary in order to continue the level of service that the business community has come to expect. As a result, staff request that City Council received the supporting documentation into the record. Conclude the hearing. Authorize a one year continuation of the Bixby Knolls parking improvement area and I'm available to answer questions. Thank you. We're going to now first do public comment on the hearing. If there's any public comment on the hearing, please come forward. See none that I will take this public comment. We missed you there. Thank you. Good evening, Mr. Mayor. Council members, city management. We're happy to be here tonight to represent. Please introduce yourself. Oh, pardon me. Blair Cohn, director of the Big Four, Niles Business Improvement Association 4313 Atlantic Avenue. Happy to be here again to continue the momentum and the energy we have in Bixby and also to improve the business corridors and connect the community with our businesses. We've worked really hard. There's two of us, two and a half of us, really, that are dedicated to doing everything we can to make it a thriving business district and be a model for other, other neighborhoods, frankly. This year is a little different, of course, because we started to look ahead for the future, how we're going to continue to grow the association. We're in year four of our ten year contract and we said if we don't do something now to to save the association with the funds that we're receiving, the dominoes would fall, which means staff would start to leave and literally there'd be somebody just sitting by the phone in the office. So we did about a four month study comparing other bids in the city, their size, their assessment fees. And we found kind of a middle ground. And we found also we were the cheapest of all the the associations. And we think we provide a high level of service to our to our membership. So we found a level of of revenue we think we can hit by increasing up to $250 a year, which is still lower than some of the newer bids in the city and doing the CPI continually. So when the contract ends, the revenue remains where we are. We continue to do our clean team or our events and all of the energy we do. And and I thank all the Council for your support in the past. And currently, of course, seventh and eighth was we worked tightly together. So I have I'm here any questions. But thank you for the opportunity. Thank you. Any other. I think we've another public comment. Laurie Angel, a former PAC chair for North PAC, and Blair was the our vice chair and we were a great team and redevelopment really supported the B.K. BIA and I greatly appreciate that Blair is so forward thinking in addressing the issue with funding because there is a big dearth with redevelopment gone. But he does an excellent job. He's a leader in all the bids throughout the city and he has a lot of great ideas. And I know he served on your transition team and I think he probably did a great job. Thank you. Thank you. Seeing no other public comment. We're going to go ahead and take this back back to the council and just start off with council member Austin. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think the work of the Bixby North Business Improvement Association is pretty well known throughout the city of Long Beach. And if not that, the region, this is the first adjustment to their assessment rates since it was established in 1995. The new assessment rate provides a flat fee for all businesses and a discounted rate for nonprofit organizations. The rate is very competitive with all the other business improvement districts in the city. This assessment also provides a much simpler visa structure doing away with variable rates depending on the type of business as well as the per employee surcharge . I understand that there are some concerns from some of the small business owners, but by and large, I think it's very clear for almost all the businesses in the Bixby knows area that this investment is well worth their own commercial quarter's investment. Not only does the KBIA put on great community events such as First Fridays, which I'm pleased to say that many of my colleagues, if not all of you guys, have actually participated in first hand. But the Baker bill also provides many other benefits for the businesses. Along Atlantic and Long Beach Boulevard. That are not always so evident. And I don't know anyone who is able to get more for a dollar or be creative with maximizing resources than my good friend Blair Cohn and his staff. Chris The leaders in Tacoma, Ashcraft, the staff of the Bixby BIA, they provide security services throughout the business district. They have have they have a clean team that stays on top of litter, graffiti and other issues. And they have undertaken numerous facade improvements, landscaping projects and other beautification areas, efforts in the district. They also manage the Expo Art Center, which has become a hub of cultural and performing arts in the center in the city. And the Bixby staff and board have also done a great job in connecting the businesses with the community and raising the profile and prestige of the Bixby Knolls community. The Uptown Renaissance actually started right there in Bixby knows this assessment is critical for the BIA to continue. The level of outstanding services. That they provide to the businesses and the entire community. And with that, I would move that we accept the the recommendation. There's been a motion and a second seen no other council comment. There's been a motion on the floor. We've closed public comment. Members, please go and cast your votes on the hearing. Motion carries nine votes. Thank you. We will now be moving on to the next items, beginning the items that we moved up. So we're going to begin by going through items 16 and 17 and we will actually be taking three separate votes on six, taking two votes for 16, which I'll explain in a minute.

A bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification for 3001 South Federal Boulevard in Harvey Park South. Approves a map amendment to rezone property from CMP-EI2 to PUD-G 24, PUD-G 25 and U-MX-3 with waivers (rezoning of Loretto Heights campus), located at 3001 South Federal Boulevard in Council District 2. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 3-30-21.

DenverCityCouncil_05102021_21-0333

11 Eyes. 11 Eyes. Counsel Bill 20 1-0308 has passed. Moving along to our second hearing. Councilmember Black, would you please put council bill three, three, three on the floor? Yes I moved that council. Bill 20. 1-0333 be placed upon. Final consideration and do pass. All right, thank you. We have our motion and our circuit. The combined public hearing on council Bill three, three, three and council bill 352 is open. Speakers may offer comments on either or both items. After the conclusion of the public hearing, council will vote separately on each. But first, May we have the staff report, please. Great. Thank you. Council President Joe Moore and good evening. Members of Council Jason Morrison, senior city planner with Community Planning and Development. I'm here to present the rezoning application at 3001 South Federal Boulevard, or the property more commonly known as Loretto Heights. The request is from MPI too, which is a campus zone district to customize zoning of potentially 24 Fields 25 and Annex three with waivers. So before I begin, I do want to provide a little background on how we got here this evening. In 2018 at TCU University sold the former Loreto Heights campus, which presented a unique opportunity to build on the site's legacy through a sensitive redevelopment that incorporates the vision of the surrounding community. For over a year, CPD worked with neighborhood residents and stakeholders to capture the community vision for this area. The community driven public process builds on previous work done by local leaders and neighborhood groups who have been eager to put a plan in place for many years. This planning process included a significant outreach component, which consisted of ten steering committee meetings, four public meetings, including an all Spanish language meeting. Two online surveys, which yielded 2300 individual comments and the distribution of over 25,000 fliers. Some of the key land use recommendations that came out of the plan include preserve and reuse historic structures and features, encourage affordable housing development, promote a diverse mix of uses, and allow for a variety of building heights and intensities. There are also a number of mobility, connectivity and open space recommendations found throughout the Lorelei Heights area plan. This plan was adopted in September of 2019 and ensures that decisions such as this rezoning are done with current policy guidance in place that reflects the community's vision. 70 acre subject site is in Council District two, which is Councilman Kevin Flynn's district in southwest Denver. The site is in the Harvey Park South Statistical neighborhood. And as I mentioned, the existing zoning is CPI to which is intended to be applied to smaller to medium scale educational campus sites adjacent to lower density residential districts. Maximum building heights are 150 feet, maximum and 75 feet maximum, when within 175 feet of a protected district. Surrounding zoning includes single unit, multi-unit and mixed use districts of varying heights and intensities. The Ruby Hill part you claim covers the eastern half of the subject site, and maximum height restrictions range from 55 feet to 204 feet, depending on the topography. The proposed maximum allowable building heights that would result from this rezoning range from 35 feet to 110 feet. Silverado Heights Lawyer Plan provides additional guidance on maximum allowable building heights, which I will cover shortly. As previously mentioned, this is a former educational campus. Existing land uses include public and quasi public and mixed use. Surrounding land uses include single unit, multi-unit and commercial and retail. Additionally, the subject site is adjacent to Loreto Heights Park. The next two slides. So the existing context within and around the subject site, and these are some of the iconic buildings on the former campus. From left to right, we have Chris, a hall in the quadrangle. The administration building in the May Bond filled Stanton Library Theater. And these images are representative of some of the existing context surrounding the subject site. Examples include single unit and multi-unit structures, commercial uses and the Denver School of Science and Technology immediately south of the subject site. As part of one application, the applicant requests three zones a DG 24 and DG 25 for Denver Zoning Code Section 961 as well as your MCs three with a waiver to five storeys at a high level Pdg 24 would apply to the historic core of the Heights campus is based on the Denver Zoning Code District. Copyright two and addresses the preservation, adaptive reuse of the historic buildings and open spaces, along with new residential and commercial development in a campus setting. The proposed Pdg 25 allows for low scale residential development oriented toward a network of new streets and open spaces to the north and west of the historic campus. For this, Pudi has four sub areas based on a s RH 2.5 and you are x three zone districts. He proposed the Denver Zoning Code District of U.N. x three, which is urban. Mixed use for up to three stories, is intended for use in the urban neighborhood context, which is characterized by small scale, multi-unit, residential and commercial areas embedded in single unit and two unit residential areas where a building scale of three stories or 45 feet is desired. The applicant is requesting a mixed three zone district with a waiver to allow for up to five stories. And I will get into details of that request here in just a moment. In responding to the unique attributes of the subject site, new DG 24 contained several special provisions that address the design of buildings that may front open spaces or public streets. The protection and treatment of historic buildings prior to any local historic designation. The adaptive reuse of historic buildings and open spaces that may not be designated as local historic landmarks. Flexible design allowances for exterior alterations, additions, and reconstruction of these buildings. And finally, the height of buildings within a unique topography. Similarly, Dee, 25, contains several special provisions, including addressing buildings up front, open spaces and public streets, implementing land use recommendations that do not match the existing zoned district that came out of the Loreto Heights small area plan. For example three storey maximum height for rowhouse districts and a suburban neighborhood context, as well as side street standards for South Irving Street and South Julien Streets. And finally, addressing height with a unique topography, including a height incentive which rewards development meeting Denver's green building objectives. Finally, the applicant is requesting the UN through his zone district with a waiver to allow for up to five stories. This zone district is a mixed use zone district, which allows for a variety of residential, commercial and office uses. It allows the townhouse general and shopfront building forms up to three stories or 35 feet, except for the Townhouse Building Forum, which allows up to 38. The applicant is proposing a waiver and maximum building heights, which would allow it to five storeys or 70 feet. You'll find that this waiver request is consistent with the height guidance in the Loreto Heights small area plan inconsistent with CPD policy of using waivers as a bridge to future text amendments to the Denver zoning code. The CPD has identified a need for a future use by some district. In addition to this rezoning, the Loreto Heights Large Development Review Framework outlines specific regulatory steps required for implementation of the development, including completion of an infrastructure master plan, mobility study and subdivision. In addition, the framework identified potential topics for a future development agreement, including affordable housing, off site street improvements, historic preservation requirements outside of the community and open space maintenance and track. Concurrent with this MAP amendment, the applicant is proposing to record a development agreement that would ensure a number of important provisions. The development of affordable housing units on the subject site, protection of historic buildings and campus character through local historic designations and demolition prohibition. Inclusion of publicly accessible open space and enhancements to Loreto Heights Park. Compliance with the Denver Green Code for residential structures within the residential PV or G 25 that require additional maximum building height. And finally, a number of off site improvements along Irving Street and Julian Street. Due to the applicant's request of extended vesting rights beyond what is allowed by the zoning code at the development agreement is also before Council this evening under a separate action item. The Mountain Limit application was unanimously recommended for approval by a planning board back on March seven and moved forward by committee last month. All notification requirements have been met since the staff report was published. We've received 16 letters in support of the proposed rezoning and two letters of opposition. That said, I do know that additional letters have been sent to council, including three letters of support from those in the area. As you know, there are five review criteria when analyzing the appropriateness of the request. Additionally in Denver, zoning code section 12, four, ten, nine, there are specific review criteria for the approval of all planned unit development zoned districts, and I'll walk through these shortly. But first, we'll start with the general review criteria, which is consistency with adoption plans. As you can see, there are three adopted plans applicable to this site Comprehensive Plan 2040 Blueprint Denver as well as a little rental height. Small area plan. The proposed MAP amendment is consistent with several strategies from Conference 2040, including a number of strategies in the equitable, affordable and inclusive vision element, as well as the environmentally, environmentally resilient vision element listed here and also detailed in the staff report. Looking at Blueprint Denver Blueprint Denver identifies three future neighborhood contexts for the subject site, suburban, special District and Urban. The western portion of the property proposed to be rezoning the G 25 is predominantly within the suburban neighborhood context. The proposed pad is based on the S, s, u, s, r, h and your three zone districts and the respective suburb boundaries are mapped consistent with the neighborhood context. The proposed Pdg 25 would allow compatible low scale residential uses and some residential mixed use in appropriate building form embedded in the neighborhood. Consistent with Blueprint's description of the suburban and urban neighborhood context. The central portion of the subject property proposed to be resolved to PG 24 is identified as a special districts context. These areas offer a diverse range of amenities. The proposed PDE is based on the campus zoned district and the respective sub area boundaries are consistent with the neighborhood context map. Although the former Loreto Heights campus will no longer serve a specifically designed purpose, the application notes that the preservation of existing buildings, the integration of open space and thoughtfully design infill development will help maintain and further promote the vision for unique campus feel. Finally, the eastern portion of the state is designated as the urban neighborhood context and blueprint. Denver and the proposed um x three with waivers map for this portion of the site adjacent to Federal Boulevard is not consistent with the urban neighborhood context map and would allow for compatible residential and commercial development in an appropriate building for and facilitate the activation of a walkable public realm. The Future Places MAP identifies several place types for the subject site. The northern and western areas identified as high, medium residential, low, medium, residential and residential low. The PDS 25 boundary encompasses all of the high, medium, residential, low, medium, residential and residential low to high guidance and allowable building forms built into the Crescent Zone District is intended to respond to the existing single unit structures to the West in the North and provide a variety of residential uses that competitively transition to higher intensity uses the closer you get to the campus core. The future places map shows the central portion of the subject property as part of the campus area within the district's context. Pudi 24 boundary encompasses the campus feature place type custom zoned district will offer a variety of sensitive infill development, including retail, residential and office uses, which will serve the surrounding neighborhood consistent with the blueprint. Denver Place Type Description. Finally the northwest corner of the subject properties identified as a corridor feature place type and most of the eastern portion of the proposed rezoning along Federal Boulevard is identified as the community center place type. The proposed U.N. x three with waivers boundary encompasses the Community Center and Community Corridor feature Peyton Place type. The general purpose of this Zone district is provide a mix of residential, commercial and office uses that promote a safe, active and pedestrian scaled street edge. The Zone District is intended for corridors, embedded neighborhood business areas and larger sites. Staff finds that the proposed math amendment is consistent with the future place mapped in this area. Looking at Blueprint's growth strategy, the western portion of the subject property is located within the all other areas of the city growth area where 10% employment growth and 20% housing growth is anticipated by 2040. Blueprint Denver identifies the eastern portion of the property along Federal Boulevard as a community centers and corridors growth area. These areas are expected to see 20% of new employment growth and 25% of new housing growth by 2040. The proposed MAP amendment is consistent with the growth strategy map for this area. The proposal allows for a variety of residential infill development that will support housing growth, as well as an appropriate level of mixed uses that will enable the growth of employment opportunities. An equity analysis was done for this property and the subject site is in an area with below average access to opportunity. The proposed rezoning from the Campus Zone District will enable a greater mix of residential, retail, commercial and pedestrian oriented uses within close proximity to the surrounding community. The anticipated development that will result from this rezoning has the potential to bring additional services and amenities, including publicly accessible open space that draws residents and visitors into the site from the surrounding community. Improvements to infrastructure, streetscape and existing network of local and regional trails will further improve multimodal connectivity and greater accessibility in the community. Staff finds that this rezoning application will have a positive impact on improving access to opportunity in the area. The subject's site is in an area that is more vulnerable to displacement. The proposed rezoning from the Campus Zone District will enable greater access to jobs and a diversity of residential opportunities, including both for sale and for rent in units. The rezoning will allow for a variety of residential building forms, including middle density housing. Additionally, an affordable housing agreement has been finalized concurrent with this rezoning, and this agreement will ensure the provision of for rent and for sale affordable housing units on the subject site. These affordable units will be available to households of diverse income levels, dispersed equitably throughout the site size to accommodate a variety of households and of similar type to market rate housing units and redevelopment staff. Stop of this rezoning application will have a positive impact on this measurement and has the potential to greatly improve the vulnerable displacement score for this area over time. Subject site is in an area that has above average housing diversity. This area is considered not diverse for one of the indicators, and that's percent of middle density housing, and that's anywhere from 2 to 19 units. Is anticipated that the proposed rezoning from the Campus Zone District will further increase the diversity of housing options in the area, including single unit duplex. It will small scale and large scale multi-unit options such as townhomes, rowhouses. And apartment building forms. Subject site has a job mix that is similar to the city's overall mix of job types. The proposed zone districts will continue to allow various commercial office and retail jobs in the area consistent with the citywide average. Staff finds that on balance, this rezoning application will continue to have a positive impact on the area's jobs diversity. We print Denver provides additional recommendations when it comes to rezonings such as this one that include a historic preservation component as well as a customized zoning approach. The proposed G 24 would promote the preservation and adaptive reuse of the historic resources on the former Loreto Heights campus and would facilitate its continued use consistent with the recommendations we find in Blueprint Denver. Additionally, due to the many unique attributes of the property, including the challenging topography and the variety of remaining historic resources located in the center of the site, there is no standard zoned district that can address the site's unique and extraordinary circumstances. Similarly, the Pwds and Next Three District with waivers will assist in implementing the land use recommendations from the Loreto Heights small area plan that do not match an existing zoning district. Therefore, the use of a puti and a standard district with waivers is consistent with the recommendations we find a blueprint. Denver. Next we're looking at the Loreto Heights small area plan, the neighborhood context and future place. Maps created in this plan provide detailed guidance for use in rezonings and other policy decisions. In 2019, these maps updated the same blueprint Denver Maps. As a result, you'll find consistency in staff's analysis in this section with the future place and context maps previously discussed. Consistent with the blueprint Denver Mapping and analysis, there are three different future neighborhood contexts for the subject property and that suburban special district and urban. The proposed PD 25 would allow complex compatible residential uses and some residential mixed use in an appropriate building form embedded in the neighborhood consistent with the lower Hyde smaller airplane. Description of the suburban and urban neighborhood context. Similarly, the proposed Pdg 24 is appropriate and consistent with the Special District's context plan direction, as it will allow for the preservation and adaptive reuse of historic buildings and new residential and commercial development in a campus setting. Finally, the proposed U.N. actually with waivers, would allow for compatible residential and commercial development in an appropriate building for the facilitate activation of a walkable public realm, which is consistent with the urban context description. Consistent with the blueprint. Denver Mapping and analysis. The Future Places map identifies several place types for the subject site. Pdg 25 allows for low scale and medium scale residential development oriented toward a network of new streets and open spaces. Pdg 24 addresses the historic core of the former rights campus with the preservation and adaptive reuse of historic buildings and the customized zoned district will allow for a variety of sensitive infill development, including commercial, residential and office uses, which will serve the surrounding neighborhood consistent with a low rate small area plan. Place. Type. Description. The proposed U.N. makes three waivers, provides a mix of residential, commercial and office, uses that promote a safe, active and pedestrian skilled street edge. The Zone District is intended for corridors like Federal Boulevard, embedded better neighborhood business areas and larger sites like the former Loreto Heights campus. The carefully calibrated high guidance in the P g 25, which allows for a maximum of two and a half to three stories in allowable building forms into the Customs Zone. District is intended to respond to the existing single unit structures to the north and the west of the site and provide a variety of residential uses that competitively transitions to higher intensity uses the closer you get to the campus core. The proposed maximum allowable building height 5 to 8 storeys and the ADG 24 in the mass and scale of building varies as appropriate when considering the historic status of the site. Du G, 24, contains massing footprint and spacing requirements and restricts the number of placement of any building over five storeys on the site to a single location. Finally, the Loreto Heights area plan recommends a five storey maximum height on the eastern portion of the site in the unmixed three zone district. The waiver to five stories helps to improve the transition between commercial development and adjacent residential neighborhoods like the College View Neighborhood to the east. The proposed rezoning will result in uniform application of zoned district building form, use and design regulations. It will also further the public health, safety and welfare by implementing adopted plans, as well as providing enhanced design standards, a broader mix of uses and mobility improvements as well as much needed affordable housing. And the application identifies change or changing conditions as justifying circumstance with the newly adopted plan guidance in the recently adopted the red light small area plan. The requested Pdg 24, pdg 25 and you three with waivers is consistent with the neighborhood context, description, zoned district purpose and intent, which I won't get into right now. In addition to the general review criteria, Denver's zoning code Section 12 four nine contains additional review criteria for the approval of all planned unit development zone districts. Staff finds that the proposed districts are intended to respond to unique and extraordinary circumstances where more flexible zoning than what is achieved through a standard zone district is desirable on and multiple variances, waivers and conditions to be avoided. One example of a unique and extraordinary circumstance to preview 25 is where a development site has specific, special physical characteristics, including lots with significant topography. There is a significant amount of topography on the western portion of the redevelopment site, and the site cannot be redeveloped under the existing zoning or any standard zoned district without significant waivers and conditions, while also addressing buildings that front desired open spaces. Specifically, there is approximately 133 feet of fall on the western portion of PGE 25, which equates to about a 9% average grade. And there are areas within the party where the grade is upwards of 11%. Additionally, within the western portion of the site, there are a number of unique existing conditions, including a 100 foot wide Denver water easement, an existing irrigation ditch to be preserved, and a cemetery also to be preserved to the northwest of the site. As previously stated, Pdg 25 will further implement land use recommendations that do not match an existing Denver zoning code zone district. Similarly, one example of unique and extraordinary circumstance applicable to PD 24 is where a customized zoning approach is necessary to protect and preserve the character of a historic structure or historic district. Pdg 24 will enable standards to protect historic buildings prior to any local historic designation and by supporting the adaptive reuse of historic buildings in open spaces that are not expected to be formally designated. With flexible design allowances for exterior alterations, additions and new construction. According to section 9.6.1.1. D in the Denver zoning code. In return for the flexibility in site design, a district should provide significant public benefit. Staff finds that the districts are compatible with the goals and objectives of current plan for providing significant public benefits, including the provision of a diverse range of affordable housing options, including different price points types, and a mix of rental and for sale units. Provision of publicly accessible open space and valuable connections to the adjacent Liberto Heights Park and Regional Trail Network, including the Platte River Trail, development patterns compatible in character and design with surrounding neighborhoods while preserving the historic structures and character of the former Loreto Heights campus. Expanded allowed uses on the former campus while providing a storage structure is more flexibility to adapt to new uses over time. And finally, investments in public infrastructure, including public roads which improve East-West vehicular and pedestrian connections throughout the subject site. The remaining criteria are listed here on your screen. The first criteria is that the districts comply with all applicable standards and criteria. As stated in Division 9.6, staff finds the proposed districts comply with the standards and criteria stated in Division 9.6 next that the development proposed on a subject property is not feasible under any other zone districts and will require a reasonable number of variances, waivers and conditions. As previously described, the site would require several variances or waivers to the standard. As you are age, you are X and copy two zone districts to accommodate the development, most notably the location, side streets, standards, height and scale of the allowed development in Pdg 25 and the flexible building standards needed to preserve and maintain existing buildings, including G 24. There is no other zoned district which would accommodate the development without variances or waivers. Next, the district establishes permitted uses that are compatible with existing land uses adjacent to the subject property. Stock lines of the district proposes uses consistent with those allowed in the SS. You are age, you are X and C empty zone districts with additions and modifications described previously. These uses are appropriate to apply to a site currently used for public and quasi public uses in a suburban neighborhood and are surrounded by varying residential intensities and commercial areas. Finally, the beauty district establishes permitted building forms that are compatible with adjacent existing building forms, or which are made compatible through appropriate transitions at the boundaries of the districts. Staff finds that the districts allow building heights and building forms that are compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods, and the setback and building form restrictions ensure appropriate relationships to adjacent properties and the character of the campus core as well as the surrounding community. With the finding that all general review criteria have been met in Denver's zoning code, section 12, four, ten, seven and 12, four, ten, eight, as well as the additional criteria. And Denver Zoning Code Section 12 for ten nine staff recommends approval of application 2019 00165. And thank you. And we are available to answer any questions you may have. All right. Thank you for the presentation, Jason. And we'll go ahead and ask you. Thank you for taking your screen sharing down tonight. Council has received four written comments on Council Bill three, three, three and there are four submitted comments in favor of the application and no submitted comments in opposition of the application. Council has also received nine written comments on Council Bill 352. There are seven submitted comments in favor of the application and two submitted comments in opposition of the application. All members of Council that are present have certified that they have read each of the submitted written comments. Do any members need more time in order to read all of the written testimony that was submitted? All right, scene one council secretary. Let the record reflect that all written testimony both in favor and in opposition of Council Bill three, three, three and Council Bill 352 have been read by each member of Council and all written testimony will be submitted to the official record of the hearing this evening for this combined public hearing. Four, three, three, three and three, five, two. We have 27 individuals signed up to speak and we will go ahead and get started. And our first speaker is Chris Shears. Yes. Good evening. My name is Chris Years. 1550 Wynkoop. And I'm a consultant to the applicant and I'm available for questions. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Chris. Our next speaker this evening is Daniel Craig. Evening. Thanks for your time. Council and resided. Daniel Craig resided at 3111 West 36th Avenue. Denver, Colorado. I don't own one and I'm available for questions as well. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Daniel. Our next speaker is Marcus Harkness. All right, Marcus. And you will have to go ahead and unmute yourself. City Council members and Marcus Faulkner. I am here for questions as well. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Our next speaker is Nash Noel. And now you're going to have to go ahead and a new and so it star six on your phone. You hear me now? Mm hmm. Go ahead. Union council members. Yep. My name is Nash Noel. I'm a consultant for the applicant as well. And here for any questions you guys may have. All right. Thank you, Nash. Our next speaker is Annie Bensky. Hi, I'm Annie Levinsky, executive director of historic Denver at 1420 Ogden Street. We participated in the Small Area Plan Steering Committee and have remained. Engaged in the project. Planning and committee discussions over the last few years. And throughout the process, both the community meetings and the steering committee meetings. Participants and stakeholders have. Emphasized to prioritize the preservation of the unique assets and qualities of the campus. And certainly Loretto Heights is the most significant historic site in southwest Denver. And it's notable not just for its architecture, for its special cultural and historical associations, including its. Association with women's. History, something that we think is. Particularly special. As an organization. We've remained committed to the role that we can play in the preservation of the site as a partner. And we appreciate the care that has been placed in the on the rezoning and the use of the zoning that recognizes the unique attributes in this place. The specific role historic Denver agreed to play back in 2019. And what I'm happy to answer questions about this evening is to hold a perpetual preservation easement on the main administration building and chapel. This was conveyed as part of the small area plan adoption and included in the development agreement. A preservation easements are a long established tool that protect buildings through legal agreement according to preservation values. We have been in a qualified is not holder for nearly 50 years helping to protect 69 iconic properties across the metro area. Using this particular tool, we have been working to negotiate this easements and have experienced some delays during the pandemic and as West Side worked out other aspects of the development plans, it has been our understanding and goal that the easement agreement would be. Executed. Along with the development agreement. However, we have not fully resolved all the aspects of the easement agreement. Despite numerous conversations and some drafts. Even up to this afternoon. It's important that the easement provide the level of protection worthy of this building and this property and promise to the community and be an agreement that's consistent with the standards . Of our organization. And best easement practices. So we remain fully committed to getting the agreement done, and we'll continue to work on it in good faith. And I'm available to answer questions about that if needed. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Our next speaker is Eric Browning. Good evening, Eric Browning. I'm the acting building official for Community Planning and Development, and I'm here to answer questions. All right. Thank you. Our next speaker is Sochi guy Tom. And you might need to hear me. Oh, there you go. Yeah, go ahead, please. Yes. Hi. So Itchy Gaitan, a. 19 year homeowner in Harvey Park, the first woman of color president of the Harvey Park Community Organization. Also known as Hip Girl. I'm no longer president. I'm now co-chair of the Colorado Latino Forum. I spoke to you. About two years ago, the typical president to share. That my board had voted to oppose the lowering. Of Heights area plan and the metro district plan. Also to share with you then several concerns that had come out of our research and conversations. So I speak to you today to ask you to vote no on the zoning change request. The Denver City Council. As you all continue with your renewed commitment to racial and social justice, I ask that you help our bipoc communities in Southwest Denver by helping to stave off some of the major gentrification sweeps that are taking place now, which will also be the outcome by approving this zoning change request. And in your commitment to racial and social justice, it only makes sense. To work. Towards dismantling racist, social, structural systems such as these types of zoning requests from major developer developers like West Side Investment. Partners. I also ask you to question the consequences of approving this zoning change request. I support smart growth and. Development when. It's done via the lens. Of equity. And social justice, which is very. Different than overdevelopment. And so. What I've seen and experienced. And is a proven fact now that under the current mayor's administration. The city of Denver is the second. Most gentrified city in the nation. Displacing vulnerable communities such as my bipoc community, also low. Income white families. And what is proven fact is how much dark. Money has been. Poured into campaigns of current politicians. By many developers. That do the work in this city, including West. Side. Another fact is that West Side sits on the board of over 17 metro districts holding power and complete control over the districts. And the property. Taxes of the homes and. Businesses within the boundaries. And they reinvest the bonds from their benefit for their benefit. And on the backs of working families. So as you approve this request, it opens the floodgates. And to. A wide range of liberties. And so I ask you to think about. The following one. It gives them legally enforceable. Agreement with a guarantee for the developer site plan. That does not include community. Concerns to total 20 years of vesting rights for the. Developer as opposed to a. Typical five years. Three. No guarantees that the developer will address traffic concerns in and around the campus. Thank you for your public comment this evening. Our next speaker is Donna Rapp. Good evening. I'm Donna Reed. 4830 West Colorado Avenue. I'm a representative of the South Mali, at which you're in Park Reno. And I served as my neighborhood's backup on the official Loretta Hyde steering committee. My neighborhood unanimously voted. To approve the. Small area plan, which was developed in partnership with the community. And we continue to support this project. I can't stress enough how much from then to now this developer. Has involved the community in the visionary process. It's undeniable that Loreto Heights is a gem, truly a landmark. So when the sale of the 72 acres happened, it created a sense of doubt. In the community about what would happen next. At the time of the sale, the current zoning allowed for heights of up to 15 storeys. So the creation of an inclusive steering. Committee meant that any future development would have to wait. At the very least a whole year until the community could properly weigh in. So that was encouraging news to the community because the pause button was pushed by none other than the developer. In sure. West Side. Listen to the community. This is actually a down zone in each. R.A. appointed their own representatives to serve their neighborhoods on the committee and in the end to gather. We came up with an area plan reflective of that year long, inclusive process. Communication flowed freely to and from West Side, Denver staff and the community. And the process has always been one in which the developer actively created a space for the community to weigh in. I've never been allowed to wander freely onto Loretto Heights because it's been private property. So for the first time ever, Loreto Heights will be accessible to all people to enjoy. Remember, the vision of the steering committee has always been for Loreto Heights to have a village like feel keeping the wonderful spirit of Loreto in its character. We asked for affordable housing with a mix of other price points available. Very little traffic pedestrian and cyclist friendly. A sustainable place that fosters inclusion. This is what the community wants and is asking for. So when the developer announced that Pan Croatia Hall would be used for affordable housing. I thought, he gets it. It was a perfect first move based on the community driven process. My neighborhood association is in full support of this proposed. Rezoning. And personally I support it too. Please approve the rezoning request. So the legacy of Loreto Heights can continue to impact the Southwest Denver community in positive ways. Loreto Heights needs new life and love breathed back into this wonderful place. Thanks so much for your time and consideration and I'll stick around in case you have any other quick questions for me. Thank you. Thank you, Donna. Our next speaker is Tess Dougherty. Hi there. I want to once again. Go ahead. Okay. Okay. I just wanted to you ask that when. Decisions like this are being made, that the city council is is keeping in mind equity is keeping in mind that this that the. But decisions have not always been made, and I would argue maybe in most cases have not been made with with the with the culture of the neighborhood and and people who are most marginalized in life. And so I just, you know, I feel like a lot of these zoning decisions that I sit through and that we here are just not centering the people who have been silenced for the longest. And so I also I don't think that depending on Arnaud's as the only voice in the city for public input is is appropriate. We know that Arnaud's do not represent equitably the neighborhoods. They just don't. So I just would ask that you keep that in mind because there are so many decisions that are being made that are not centering people, people of color, low income people. They're not centering people who, you know, with disabilities. So I just it's I, I just am kind of really frustrated by some of the conversations that are not asking the right people the right questions. Thank you. Thank you, Tess. Our next speaker is Brad Billingsley. I may. Can you hear me? Mm hmm. Go ahead. Thank you. Brad Billingsley. 3940. East Wesley Avenue. Denver. 802. No. And I just want to speak to the character of West Side Development as a leader in our community. I volunteer with Food for Thought, which is a local nonprofit that addresses childhood food insecurity. We were started by local businessman Bob Bell nine years ago when he realized that many kids in Denver public schools don't have food to eat from Friday, hot lunch told the following Monday morning free breakfast at school. So back then, we started attacking stacks of foods for every student in two schools. Today we're delivering to 75 schools that are 90% or better free and reduced lunch. Many of those are in the immediate area around Loretto Heights, including College View, August Gottesman and Schmitt Elementaries. Our organization approached West Side Development two years ago with a need to create a new food packing site. We asked if we could use one of the buildings that's on Loreto Heights once they learned about what we do. They said not only yes and gave us a place to operate out of, but they also volunteered to pack food and even went so far as to buy us a forklift to help move the many pallets of food so we could feed even more kids and expand the program. Websites been critical to our ability to serve 8500 families around Denver every week, many in the Laredo Heights neighborhood. They've just demonstrated their commitment to our community quietly and consistently. They're an organization built of character that is walking the walk to help give Loreto Heights a future we can all be proud of. We've reviewed what they're asking for in terms of this development. Encourage City Council to approve the rezoning of this campus. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker this evening is Mark. With kids. With kids. I'm sorry, Mark. I'm going to let you go ahead and pronounce your last name. Go ahead. Thank you. Madam President, members of the City Council. My name is Mark White Cabbage. I am speaking as the applicant tonight. Here I am, a principal at West Side Investment Partners. Our address is 4100 East Mississippi Avenue, Glendale 80246. Our goal, Loreto Heights, was to seek to understand together as a community. As a community, we have come together to plan the next great chapter at Loretta Heights. We are very proud as to what we have accomplished together. Preservation, housing of all types. Open spaces. Community spaces, significant down zoning at the community's request. Just to name a few. We look forward to the next great chapter of Loretta Heights. And we thank you. And I'm happy to answer any questions, which I'll begin with one tonight that I heard earlier to address the comments from historic Denver . We are fully committed to finalizing the negotiations of the easement, as we have promised before. For further clarity, the property is protected. Even without the easement, it's not to say that we won't have a final easement, but the property is protected with an existing covenant for non demolition. There is very specific language with the side of the Peabody and there's also the development agreement. We do understand the importance of the conservation easement that the community and historic Denver has asked for and we are a stone's throw away from having that finalized. Again, I appreciate your time tonight, and I am here to answer any questions that you may have. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Mark. Our next speaker this evening is David Hagan. Go ahead, David. All right. Well, we'll see if we can get David to unmute here. All right. We'll go ahead and move to our next speaker and try to get him back in the queue. Claire Harris. Go ahead, please. You're going to have to go ahead and unmute yourself. All right. Here you go. Can you hear me now? Mm hmm. Go ahead and hear me now. So if you have a second device. All of you. Turn it down. I'm Claire here, so I live it. How do I look? You hear me? Hello? Mm hmm. Go ahead. Can you hear me? Yeah. Okay. I live. At 2695 West Dartmouth Avenue. In college view. And partly because of my location. I'm very invested in this project. I live about two or three blocks to the east of. Of Lorena Heights and. Students who went. To heights when it became a Japanese university. So I've watched it for many years, since 1970s. I've lived in the. All the good work at West Side is. Done with the neighborhoods. I've especially appreciated that the West Side has worked with all the neighborhoods and as Donna said in much detail. They've addressed our concerns. They planned to neighborhood meetings. They talked about maintaining the buildings. It's in the neighborhood, especially college views. Since it's actually part of our name, we're very invested in the continuation of some kind of youth. Have also. Been. One of the earlier speakers mentioned affordable. Housing and in my neighborhood college. You that's what it is affordable housing. Although I have to say that gentrification is a big issue all over town because even College View is now has million dollar homes. Another issue that they've addressed is the traffic on Dartmouth Avenue. Even Dartmouth matters to me. Personally as well as. Being part of the neighborhood. So I have to say that that west west side has been listened to. Concerns from the neighborhood addressed things that they could work very. Well in trying. To maintain what they. After that of the surrounding areas. And we appreciate that greatly in college. You. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Jim Gibson. I'm going to get Jim Gibson up into the queue here. All right. Go ahead, please. Okay. Thank you. Good evening. My name is Jim Gibson. I live at two seven, eight, seven South Stuart Street, board member of the Hardy Park Community Organization, otherwise known as hip hop. My involvement with the redevelopment of the Arts campus began in 2016. I led an effort to conduct a series of community conversations in 2017 that resulted in the document community recommendations, which were shared with West Side Investment Partners shortly after it was announced the company had bought the property. I also served on the steering committee of the city sponsored Laredo Heights area plan and as a result, the Hip Hop Board asked me to serve as chair of the Liberal Arts Subcommittee and represent hip cause position this evening. The Harvey Park Community Organization and the community we represent are largely in favor of the rezoning of the liberal arts campus. We will support the rezoning of this project with the commitment of the City and Western investment partners to address the following two major concerns over the course of the project. We look forward to working with the city and the developer on these items. Major concern. Number one, we're concerned about the effects of gentrification and displacement in our community. We recommend that the city and all developers take into consideration anti displacement measures such as rent subsidies, a city living wage, utilizing a localized area, median income and increased services and supports. For example, we recognize that the aim for affordable housing units is set at the regional rate of $100,000 for a family of four. Our concern is that the amount immediately surrounding the Loreto Heights campus is roughly $63,000. Therefore, we recommend to the city and county of Denver and the West Side investment partners that the AMA should be based on a more localized geographic area rather than the Denver metro area in this development and in all future developments. Major concern. Number two, a community services center should be formally included on the campus to provide essential community services to the local area related and unrelated to the redevelopment. Some additional concerns. The redevelopment should have a maximum five storey building height net zero carbon emission goals should be put in place for the redevelopment. An ordinance and or a new provision in the development agreement should be approved by Denver City Council to ensure that Dartmouth Avenue remains closed and roadways should have four way stops. At a date certain. A raised federal boulevard meeting in front of the campus should be constructed to maximize pedestrian safety, and a three legged car should be covered by the developer. The Federal Boulevard traffic signal should stay in Amherst, not move to Bates. If the signal is moved, the developer should pay the cost. City Council should require that adequate time be provided for community review of the finalized traffic impact study before the rezoning request is approved. And we also finally, we recommend that the city's process for community involvement in future developments undergo rigorous capacity building around diversity, equity, justice and inclusion. Thank you for your time and I'm available. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker, we're going to go back to David Hagan and see if we can get him in the queue. Hello? You hear me? Go ahead, David. Sorry, my phone died and I'm not at anymore. I really appreciate the gentleman that just spoke. Unfortunately, I don't think our city work that way. If we let them pass this right now, none of your concerns will be met and need to be changed. The lady that spoke earlier about her fellow bipoc folks I think is pretty much spot on. When I hear the city talk about. Affordable housing or mixed income housing. It really scares me when they don't start telling me how many. What is it? What does affordable housing mean? Because from. What I can understand or what I gather in the city of 80% AMI is. Affordable housing. Well, 80% AMI $100,000. I mean, it doesn't get any done. No, that doesn't just look like if you read that book. I mean, there's people that are going to folks that are going to need 20 and 30%. Amy, we're not going to displace people. And I don't know why, but the city continues never, ever provide that or when they do it, very limited. Um, I think that we need that just in general. There needs to be a little bit more transparency. Well, I mean, a lot more transparency of what the city's got going on when it comes to stuff like this . Um, just telling us that affordable housing doesn't really. It basically. Means there's not any affordable housing because if. You are going to have affordable housing, it's bragging about how good a job you doing. So when zoning comes in is that that we know they're pushing it and they need to take it back to the drawing board and come back, give us something and. Refrain from any profane language. David Oh, I'm sorry. The city's been firing me up lately. And for you to. Not out of anything but passion. So I wish some of the people on this council cared about as much about the city as I do. That's all I got. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Martha Kirkpatrick. Go ahead, Martha. You're going to have to admit. There you go. Go ahead. Sorry. Thank you, counsel. My name is Martha Newland Kirkpatrick. I'm a 1982 graduate. Of Lawrence Heights College, where I received my Bachelor of Arts degree. I grew up in southwest Denver. The Harvey Park in the Bear Valley. Neighborhoods, and I currently live in Inglewood. So Lorena Heights has been part of my life for my entire life. Through community and alumni groups. Particularly, that were at a high community initiative. I became very involved about what the future health. Of his property. When Westside purchased the property in July 2018, West Side welcome the small area plan process and also took to heart the. LHC EIS recommendations to help inform and dove deeply into what the community wanted and needed. Through community meetings held on the campus. Property. Dozens of meetings. With R.A. groups from the surrounding neighborhoods. A year's worth of meetings through the small area plan process. The development team has joined hands with. All of us to craft a vision for the future of Arad. Heights. While most of us understand that not. Everyone will get everything that they want, most of us will get something that we do. And what the. Larger community wants. Is a gathering place somewhere to. Find respite and a good meal, a street. Fair, lush greenspace, an outdoor concert or a. Comfortable home. The words that come to mind, come to mind our respect. Reverence, reuse, reclaim, and the other key word that many don't wish to utter redevelopment. However, this redevelopment is being done in a different way. By respecting the wishes of the community that they will be using. And living nearby by revering the past. And letting it inform the future, by reusing. And reclaiming what was once grand and bringing it. Back to a full, colorful. And vibrant life. There are some that. Would have you believe that more time or a different plan or another developer. Might be the best strategy. But the campus has become a ghost and a shell. Quietly crumbling and fading away. It will never be what it once was. That time has passed. Let it be rewarded for waiting. Let it be rewarded with voices and laughter, life and a new legacy. Dedication to the processes and the requests for a rezoning. Exemplified by. A significant down zoning from approximately a 12 million square foot allowance to approximately a 2 million square foot development shows. That West Side Investment Partners has a vision for the future with the desires of the Southwest Denver community. Firmly in mind. I completely support West Side Investment Partners and the request for rezoning of the Loreto Heights campus property. Thank you, Counsel. I appreciate your time. Thank you, Martha. Our next speaker this evening is Sister Mary Nell Gage. Oh, there you go. Good evening. Thank you. My name is Mary Nell Gage. I am a 1966 graduate of Loretto Heights College, and I am a sister of Loreto for over 50 years. I endorse, I affirm the. Application for. Rezoning. Of the. Loreto Heights campus. I have been blessed during the last four years with engaging with neighbors and residents of Southwest Denver alumni and civic stakeholders, historical preservationists. Denver city officials. And West Side investment partners in. Discussions and. Conversations. Regarding the redevelopment. Of Loreto Heights. It has been both instructional and inspirational to be involved in such a process. I applaud the encouragement extended to those most affected by the redevelopment. To be involved in the process. I am. Grateful for that experience. Going forward. I know we will ensure both historical preservation as well as creating what. Will be needed for the benefit of our city. Honoring what has been created. By man and woman on the campus has been. One of the ideals in the respectful redevelopment. Plans. Equally important. Is enhancing the environment so that God's beautiful creation may continue to. Inspire all who are seeking. Home opportunities. To work. To learn. To play. To pray. That which has characterized Loretta Hyde since 1888. The cemetery. Where 62. Pioneer Sisters are buried. Is on the grounds. And we. Will continue to be in conversation. With Westside. Regarding the insurance. That that. Space will always be held sacred. I am confident that the motto engraved in stone. Above the academy. Building three days mores cultura will be promoted so that all who come. Will. Share the ideals of faith. Morals and culture. May the light from the. Tower. Give guidance to all who come. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker this evening is Guadalupe Floyd. Hi. Hi. Go ahead. Good evening. City council members. And hello. My name is Guadalupe Lloyd. I live at 3260. West Amherst. Denver 80236. And I share the northwest backyard with the Loretto Heights campus right behind me here. I am a native of Chicago, but have been visiting this campus and neighborhood for over 30 years. Since 1988, when my sister and her husband moved to their home on the west side of the campus on Irving Street. My mom and dad followed in 2000. And this is where I now live. My family was the primary reason that I. I first started coming to Denver, Colorado Heights campus and the neighborhood have made me living here. My home. Sorry, I have to read this. I don't remember everything. I have invested countless hours and energy to make sure that this campus both reflects and honors our neighborhoods, our neighborhood. Along with spending the last three years working on the redevelopment of the former. The Retro Heights campus. I am impressed with the collaboration that has taken place between the neighbors, the city and the developer. As a neighbor who will continue to share a fence with the proposed development, these rezoning applications have my full support. Since the beginning of this small area plan, I have been an active stakeholder throughout the entire process. I have been to most of the community meal meetings held on a monthly basis. As well as. Meetings in my R.A.. I understand the vision of the campus, the rezonings that will bring it to life, and the concept plans for Redevelop for Development. I love this neighborhood and my ranch house right next door here on the north side of the campus. And I am sure there are parts of me that wanted the campus to remain. But these changes are wonderful and will bring community amenities along with housing for all, and will honor the tradition of the Sisters of Loreto and the campus. Please join me in supporting the proposed rezoning rezoning applications. Finally, I believe that great collaboration has been shown by all parties. We as a community are proposing a medium density village like development that will be a treasure for our neighborhood and all southwest Denver. I thank you for your consideration. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Mark Upshaw. Can you. Hear me? Yes, go ahead, please. Madam President and members of city council. My name is Mark Upshaw. I live about 400 feet west of the campus on West Dartmouth Avenue. I live in the Dartmouth Heights neighborhood, a homeowners association of 72 homes. We share the western boundary of a lot of heights defined by South Irving Street and South Julien Way. I am co-chair of the Dartmouth High School Liaison Committee for Loreto Heights Campus Development. Tonight, I am speaking on behalf of the Dartmouth Heights neighborhood. We support the plan and urge City Council to adopt this on request. Our comments tonight are a brief summary of our position statement dated May six, 2021. It is in your information packet. The Zombies for you are a rational and natural outgrowth of the Florida Heights area plan. The small area plan was a public process managed by the Denver Community Planning Development Office. It was adopted with widespread community support by City Council in the fall of 2019. West Side Development Partners on their own initiative and under the leadership of Marc Rich, principal and project manager, has continued community engagement by holding regularly scheduled community meetings via Zoom during the infrastructure masterplan process. West Side has listened to our concerns, sought to fully understand them and incorporate them as appropriate into the development designs throughout the process . We are also. Pleased. That they have. Donated 300,000. To the city for improvements to the right of heights. Or out of Hyde Park, that is Loretta Hyde Park is located immediately north of our neighborhood. However, we continue to be concerned about the traffic impacts to our neighborhood, especially the real possibility of cuts through traffic that would use our neighborhood streets as conduits. For this reason, we strongly encourage the incorporation of calming devices on the campus to slow and discourage cut through traffic. We solicit your cooperation in expressing this concern to the Department of Transportation and Infrastructure, the mayor's office, and other appropriate city agencies. Also, we solicit cooperation from city and elected officials that there be an ongoing monitoring of traffic volumes in our neighborhood in appropriate intervals. As the campus construction progresses, such moderating will determine your traffic calming and management features are needed around the new development, and particularly in our neighborhood. We thank you for listening to our comments. We have hopes for a truly livable community that will make Southwest, Denver and the city at large proud. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker this evening is Lydia Pena. Go ahead, please. Oh, let me see. You've got to get you to unmute again. There you go. Thank you very much. City Council Members. I'm Lydia Pena, a sister of Loreto. Loreto Heights College was my home for 27 years, four years as a student and 23 years as the sister of Laredo faculty member on the campus. Matchup of Hall was opened with the first Christmas banquet in 1951 when I was a freshman. The view of the mountains from that dining room nurtured my soul for many years. The plan, put forth by West Side remodels match for use by the community that will be created on those grounds. It lends to the exceptional beauty of the property itself. Mark the cabbage. From West Side investment has been so respectful of the values brought to that land. My sister in Croatia, Boniface, and the first sisters of Loreto in 1888 when they purchased the property. For some three years. Mark and his team have invited the wider community of interested persons to meetings where they listened to a variety of individuals. Because of those meetings, they generated an amazing, sustainable plan with open space and affordable housing with reduced density. The Great Land will have helped bring the community together. Mark and Justine spoke. And I saw evidence of the values of those sisters who began living and working there 130 years ago. We human beings all have impressions, opinions, and it is easy to assume that what I think is fact. I have accumulated many years and as I've done that, I learned the importance of checking the evidence, the truths, the facts with. I listened to opinions and in my opinion, check what they heard the wider community saying and embedded and into a plan that respects the values of us. Sisters of Loreto. And I, as a student and sister of Loreto, wholeheartedly support. So I end by saying for all what has been thanks. And to all that will be. Yes. Thank you very much for your time and your skills. Thank you. Our next speaker this evening is Jean Myers. Hello. Good evening, counsel, and thank you. For hearing us today. It's been an amazing journey to work on this project with West Side. I'm the CEO of Thrive Home Builders. We're one of the builders in the project. We're located at 1875 Ward Street in Denver. The collaboration has been with West Side, our neighbors, the Sisters of Loreto and your staff, and a special thanks to Councilman Kevin Flynn for his tireless advocacy on behalf of the people district. To Thrive has three legs to this brand of efficient, healthy and local. We're based in downtown and homegrown. We understand Denver home buyers and what they want. For example, we build our homes with Colorado Beetle Kill Lumber. When we drive to the mountains, it's alarming to see the dead forests and anything good from that could come from that. Well, yes, we can build our homes with trees that have already died, reducing wildfire fuels and helping restore watersheds our customers love there. We specialize in healthy homes by building to the standards of EPA's Indoor Air Plus program. When we started in 2013, not many people connected the dots between health and the home. But in the last year, our customers have seen start clarity that home is where the health is. In 2019, we were indoor air plus builder of the Year nationally, and in 2020 we received EPA's Leader Award. We have homes in Central Park with full house separate filtration that can filter out the coronavirus. And and that provide real time indoor air quality monitoring. Finally, we build very energy efficient homes. In fact, based on evaluations of about. 300,000. Energy efficient homes built in 2024, I was recently named the most energy efficient builder in America. In addition, the US and Canada have a friendly rivalry each year and in 2023 have also won the cross-border challenge making thrive the most energy efficient builder on the North American continent. Also in 2020. We closed our last affordable townhomes that we constructed. Under the old Stapleton Affordable Housing Program. In this last project, we built homes for 271 families at 80% of AMI or less. I'm bringing all this up to let you know that you're bringing all of these attributes and all of our expertize to Loreto Heights, West Side, New that the city of Denver and. Loreto Heights deserve the best homes in America. And that's what. We are committed to building. We will build a wide range of price points in Loreto Heights for each and every home, regardless of price will be designed, built and field tested to ensure compliance with EPA, indoor air plus EOG Zero, Energy Ready and LEED certified. We ask that you give us the opportunity. To thank you team. By improving the. Time you have this evening. Our next speaker is Ali Laubach. Hi. Good evening and thank you, council members. My name is. Ellie Lowe back and I am speaking tonight on behalf of Grand Peak's. Properties. Grand Peaks Properties is also a homegrown company. We are based in Denver and our. Founders have been building here in Colorado for over 70 years. I have personally been working with Mark Djokovic and the West Side development team for over two years on the planning and zoning efforts. Here at Loreto Heights. And our organization would be the one responsible for the creation of for rent housing. And this evening, I would like to encourage you to support this rezoning request for the following reasons. First. The entire team has ensured that any of the. Zoning proposals that we've put together are consistent with the. Approved small area. Plan as the basis of community design. Furthermore, the. Applicant. Website development has done an extraordinary. Amount of community outreach and public engagement. We've been meeting with the neighborhood now for over 18. Months. And working closely with. The Sisters of Loretto as. Well throughout this process. The rezoning proposed reflects the input and lessons that we've learned from the community throughout those years. We've also engaged a comprehensive team of experts in planning and design to thoroughly understand the entire campus and the surroundings. And advise on where appropriate density should be developed. The rezoning proposal creates certainty around outcomes. It's sensitive to and. Respects the adjacent communities and the neighborhood. Context. Surrounding it. I fully believe that the rezoning that we are proposing would enable the renovation and re-use of the just. The designated historic structures on the campus. While also creating the opportunity for new neighborhood. Centered. Uses. The mix of uses and housing. Types that we are proposing would. Establish a desirable. Balance for a fully. Supported neighborhood, and that would carry into the future. So for all of the above, these are the reasons I would. Advise that Denver City Council approves a rezoning request. Thank you so much for your time tonight. Thank you. Our next speaker is Megan Beecher. Good evening. I'm Megan Becker. I'm with McGinty Becker in Denver. I represent the Loretto Heights Metropolitan Districts Mass General Counsel, and I'm here tonight to answer any questions that may arise. All right. Wonderful. Thank you. Next up is J.J. Newman. Go ahead, please. Hello? Can you hear me okay? Mm hmm. Mm hmm. Okay. Awesome. Hi, everybody. My name is John Joseph Nieman, 2786 South Wall Street, Denver, Colorado. 802 36 A good agreement is one that stands the test of time, and I would say that we now need to add that a good agreement stands the test of code with the the community involvement and outreach efforts for this property. It was comprehensive for the Lauretta Heights small area plan creation. It contained input from neighbors that belong to many affected neighborhoods around the campus. It contained experts and novice members of our community. This down zoning is good for the community and for meeting the intention of the small area plan. Meeting I. The meetings I attended showed that this developer is taking an inclusive and deliberate approach that will maximize the value of the Denver gains through its redevelopment. There are many community and government inputs that have made this plan better, and we should never let the desire of perfection be the enemy of doing good. But this plan is good and the process that has been undertaken is great. I think having multiple zoning districts allows for residential representation in your district is the correct district for the reasons mentioned earlier. Also, the New Plains will be maintained for the surrounding area with the New Zone District six, which I think is important. It also allows for the save our theater effort for the Avon Boundaries Center to continue and still be possible, which is a really big positive for the neighborhood and for the development. Yeah, certainly this plan is not perfect. Certainly we're going to see more stipulations maybe around energy efficiency and improvements of water quality, but that may just be a discussion for another time that we can address some of the more detailed pieces. I think for myself, like so many people who live in southwest Denver, I've been working on a full time job trying to keep my family safe from COVID over the last year. And so maybe we all haven't been as active as we used to be, but the training, the effort that we invested in, we wanted to see that small area plan come to fruition. I think I like so many of my other neighbors, we just know that this needs proper zoning and a well-structured funding source to make the Loretta Heights vision a reality like active, alive and functional space that many neighbors can enjoy. So with that, I would just like to say the possibilities for this redevelopment become possible because of this down zoning. So I ask for your support. Thank you. Our next speaker is Jim Hartman. Hello, counsel. My name is Jim Hartman. 2120 BlueBell Avenue in Boulder. And I'm speaking tonight in support of the application. Thank you very much for giving us the opportunity. As background and a common owner of many of the investments for as an architect and as a redevelopment specialist over the last 40 years. I'm also speaking tonight as a member and a manager of Pan Christian Hall Partners. We have a very large team that is currently redeveloping and increasing the hall, Eldorado Heights, creating 74 affordable homes for families. And I'd like to stress that the families are going to have large, unique units. Over 50% of our homes. There will be two, three and four bedroom apartments. Not the small ones, not the efficiencies in the one bedroom that you often see. And it will offer deep affordability. 30% Army units, 60%, as well as 80%. We have a very large team. PNC Bank is our major investor grant vantage of proximity. Green is our other development partner, and the city's affordable housing office host has generously provided some essential funding to our efforts. I'd like to say a little bit how we got involved in the red lights. That was over four years ago when City Councilwoman Sally Daigle from Sheridan inviting invited us to attend a community meeting. And we've listened to the community speak for four years now, and it's been really rewarding to hear how much the liberal arts community cares about this campus and these historic buildings and open spaces. I'd also like to echo Jean Myers's comments about Councilman Flynn. He truly cares. And Denver is very fortunate to have his effort at the advocacy level that he's taken to make this campus a beautiful place. I'm really impressed by the land plan. I've been involved in design review committees at Lowry Air Force Base and other places in Denver, and the design standards that have been promoted and will be adhered to and the needs of our community are outstanding. These buildings change buildings. I've seen some preliminary versions and they're good. It's going to be very nicely done. Buildings. They complement our pancreas, the hall and some of the other buildings there, maintaining the views, integrating walkable communities and pedestrian oriented features. All of that is really commendable. It's really about our heights. So my conclusion from all of this is that city council, I really hope that you support and vote yes tonight of heights is going to be a better place for Denver. If you approve this rezoning. Thank you. Thank you, Jim. Our next speaker is Preston Dial. And see. I had seen Preston in the queue here. I don't know if we. Lost Preston, but we'll go ahead and try to get Preston back up into the queue. And in the meantime, we'll go ahead and go to Jesse Paris. Go ahead, Jesse, please. Yes. Good evening. Members of council, those watching at home. My name is just Michelle Paris and I'm represented for Denver homicide or formula for Denver homeless so low currently for Black Star and for self defense positive actually work for social change as well as the Unity Party of Colorado and Frontline Black knows that I'll be the next mayor of Denver in 2023. I am torn with this redevelopment to me because on one side they try to make it seem like it's a good thing. And then the people from the community, the Bipoc community, are saying it's a bad thing and I have to go with the Bipoc community on this because. This is not affordable. Houses affordable. Uh, I heard something recently. About 30%. And my. How many units out of all the underserved calls for the site are going to actually be at 30%? At my level, even that's not affordable. We need housing that is below the 30% across the board. But every last one of these rezonings, every last one of these proposals, there needs. To be. Uh, 0 to 30%. Ami across the board, whenever you're talking about any kind of redevelopment with housing involved, if you're really trying to solve this housing crisis that we've had for at least the past four years and. This notion that the community was outreach was sufficient enough. That is not good enough there. At previous hearings on the same campus, about the same campus. We heard numerous speakers say that they were not outreach to. So somebody is not telling the truth here. And I'm not going to sit up here and try to decipher who is not or not, who is or who isn't. The fact remains that 30% A-minus was needed, not 60%. Am I not 80% am I? So I would like the ACC or West Side Development to answer the question how many units are actually going to be at 30%? Am I. If this traffic study has been completely done and. Will be implemented. And also who is benefiting? It's definitely not benefiting black. Indigenous people of color. It is a it is benefiting whites, affluent developers and residents. And the people that I spoke with tonight, majority of which have been white, affluent, rich developers and the residents of this area that have been in favor of this have no idea of the unintended consequences that are going to come from this rezoning. So we asked you. To not pass this tonight. If you pass it tonight, the voters will know that developers run this town and have the money and the time. We have a lot of this evening. Our last speaker this evening is Preston Dial. Hi. Good evening, counsel. Thank you for having me. I know it's been a long night, so I'll try to be brief. My name is Preston Down, the vice president of acquisitions for Getty Realty, a commercial real estate development company based in Nashville, Tennessee. First, I'm here in favor as a potential partner of the applicant. I represent my client, which is an organic grocer. Two quick things. One, I wanted to commend the applicant and the representatives of the community for preserving the soul of this pretty sweet place. To hear the non-speaking, to hear excuse me, the sister speak and other people, it was it's very special to potentially be a part of this. You know, the big thing that several people have said is the due diligence at West Side is done. I'm here to echo that. There's two things that continued to show up and research. One was affordable housing. We've heard a lot about that. The other was basically this community is a food desert. This place is starving for fresh food, for options with food, for affordable food, for food. I'm here and hopes to partner with West Side in my client, which is a national organic grocer, and hopes to solve that. Here at the Loretta Heights Development. I'll stay on for any questions. Thank you guys very much. Thank you, Preston. That concludes our speakers questions from members of Council on Council Bill three, three, three and or 352. Oh, right. Okay. There we go. I knew I needed to pause for a second. Council member can each. But I believe your muted. Sorry. Changing headphones. Thank you. So what an amazing testimony, but just a couple questions. So the first one is for either host or Jean Myers. So if we can promote them. And then the other one is for Nate Lucero or whoever the attorney is representing community planning and development. So let me switch views so I can. See who's joined. All right. We've got Gene up here. Gene, I might have missed this. Sorry I had to eat a bite of food. We have a long night. I am so excited about the 99 year affordability as I read it. It applies to the for sale as well, is that correct? Right. So I am again so excited. Now, in my experience, I've only ever seen 99 year affordability on for sale in the land trust environment. So I just wanted to check on, you know, the the agreement doesn't have a lot of details on the mechanism, but I understand that when you get to that long of affordability in a land trust, sometimes the land trust has to kind of infuse a little cash to keep the price within the ambit limits while still allowing families to build a little equity over time. Not like spikes in equity like we have in this boom market right now, but just a little bit of equity over time for them to build wealth. I just wondered how you'd be handling that issue in this particular approach. You know, if you're going to be continuing to anyway, I don't think you have a land trust here. So why don't you figure out correct credibility with without one? Well, as you know, we have quite a bit of experience with the deed. Restriction and we understand when it fails and when it succeeds. And we've had a good track record in our work in Central Park, not having lost a single unit, just by properly setting it up with the title company at the beginning. And so that's our plan. Got it. Can I just clarify, you don't have any concern about the price going up a little bit for owners and then going to high to stay within the 80% of EMI. At the point of transfer, you don't feel like you need any infusion of capital or reset to to do that. Like 50, 70 years out. Well, it's our our plan to just use the the city's structure for ensuring that 80% of EMI remains in place. Okay. Got it. I mean, follow up offline on the mechanism. That's great. I just wanted to ask then for Brad. We had a few speakers and I know I cannot see the slide deck through the the website, the council portal. So I don't know if the public has it either. But can you just refresh folks on the 30% of AMA and 60% of AMA housing that this is not this site is not just 80% of I said it, 80% of your median income. Can you just clarify those other affordability levels real quick? Yes. Happy to thank you, Councilwoman Kinney, so that the agreement with the West Side and all of their developer partners is to incorporate 12% of all the units that created on site as affordable writ large. Among that level, 14 for sale units will be built at a minimum, half of them affordable at 80%, and my half of them are affordable 100% my on the rental side. 40% of the units that are that to create on the rental side have to be affordable at or below 60% of AMI and 30% of those need to be restricted at or below 30% of a BMI. And so I say these things in percentages because it's based on the total number of units that are that are to be developed. The last number that I'm familiar with is roughly 1200 across all various phases, which results in 144 total affordable units. All of those percentages applied thereunder. And in addition to that, I should add that Mr. Harvey made this point within his development. But a good chunk of the units have to be two plus bedroom units as well, trying to make sure that we have larger format, family style units to support lower income families as well. Thanks. And just one quick follow up question on that. Can you describe a little bit sometimes people like to focus just on that percentage of units that are affordable. Can you just describe, in your opinion, how there might be tradeoffs between some of the things you just described and the overall percentage? I'm not sure I understand the question, but I think what you're asking is, is why maybe the overall affordability percentage of the total product product development isn't higher, and that is because it does take more resources, more capital, more support and or, you know, more difficult economic modeling to ensure that larger units are created. That lower AMI 30 even 6% units are difficult to to create and given the costs and sort of development materials, labor, etc., land. And so, you know, it takes a little bit off of the overall economics of the entire property to be able to to accommodate identified needs lower down at my spectrum into larger units. Is that what you were asking? Yeah. So there are some tradeoffs here. If you might have had 20% of units at 80% of I and said we have 12% of units, including much lower median incomes for families and more family units. So those are all negotiated. Great. My last question for the attorney, who might that be? We have Nate Lucero. He's in the queue here. Oh, I'm sorry. Okay. I just couldn't see him on my screen. We're on two screens now. Sorry. Thank you. So neat. I wanted to ask about the requirement to have a historic easement not being completed while council tonight is voting on the development agreement. And can you just walk us through what it means to execute the city's agreement and to make sure that we're in compliance with that piece that requires that to be that that separate agreement. It sounds like they're working on, but they're not quite done with yet. I just want to want to clarify that, please. Thank you so much. Nate Lucero, assistant city attorney. Good evening, members of council. So I'm just going to try to walk you through the process practically how it would work. So if council approves the bill this evening. Then the bill will need to be or the it will need to be published. And that usually occurs on Friday. So once once that's taken care of, then the city attorney's office will begin circulating the contract for signatures. And that process usually takes about two weeks. And it's not until all city's signatures are obtained that. That the contract is considered fully executed. So it's possible that the easement gets negotiated. And signed between now and then. I guess. Alternatively, there's a possibility where the city could sort of slow their signature process to kind of see if the easement catches up or if the development agreement is fully executed and there is no easement then. We could consider using the. Default provisions that are provided in the development agreement. Thank you for that answer. And I don't know if this is for you or for this CPD staffer who who negotiated the agreement. But I just want to hear from from from someone who represents the city that if the if this party does not execute any easement for this property, that either we will not be signing or we will be proceeding to some other mechanism that there is no scenario by which they don't get this easement and everything else goes forward. This is the last bite at the apple for the council, but the city has another bite at the apple. And we won't take it unless we we have an executed easement. I want that assurance, please. Jason Morrison That is correct. I also have a Jenni button work available if you have any more specific questions about what went into that agreement. I'm going to do council pencil and manage. The easement provision was placed in there for two reasons one, to provide short term protection to the Administrative Administration Building and Chapel prior to its designation as a Denver landmark, but also because easements are held in perpetuity. So they actually provide a higher level of protection for a building or buildings, even more so than local designation, which could unlikely but could in the future actually be changed to remove protections from a building. So we do find that this is a very important provision to keep within the day, and we would support it being included and being a part of this signing process moving forward. Got it. Thank you very much. Thanks. Council president. All right. Thank you, Councilmember Canete. Up next, we have council member Sandoval. Thank you. Council President. I just have one question for you, Jason. How how did you come to the conclusion that you wanted to based the PWDS on C MP, the campus and district growth? I appreciate the question, Councilman Sandoval. You know, again, a lot of this came out of the small area plan process. And, you know, we we learned very often that while this this campus is a very special place, it no longer serve that purpose. And so that being said, a nod to kind of the past of the previous life of the campus and the community wanted to see over swaths of open space, remained on plazas, trails integrated within the redevelopment, and staff felt that the most appropriate bases of district would to be to keep the zone district available and then of course add some modifications to allow for different uses to allow for the protections of those buildings as well. Thank you. And then in the period 24 and 25, they have different citing security or setbacks. And you know me, I'm totally looking at your first me application. So they have different side interior setbacks like the PD, I think 25 have 0 to 10 and then the other one has zero. So is that based on the topography and what you wanted to see an open space with with the book plane inside? That's how you got from the based on district to the waivers or down to the PD. And just to clarify you, I just pulled up my staff bracelet to make sure I was answering your question correctly. You're speaking to the G 25, is that correct? So they can be pretty G 24 has a ten side that intercept that great and then PD G 25 had 0 to 5. So they're not the same. So PD 24 and PD 25 have different side interiors effects and different type of other just building coverages and maxes. So I just was wondering how those comparison charts were created, where they created based on the topography and what this small area plan recommended, recommended. Does that make sense? It does, yes. So thank you for clarifying. So it actually has less to do with the topography and more of kind of the feel of the area. So it's a big reason why we have superfoods in the campus study, which is pretty g 24 is is more of kind of a, you know, a quieter kind of, you know, residential office type type setting and versus kind of some of those mixed use contexts as well. And so a lot of it is a nod to kind of the the open space in the area. And so the residential pretty does have setbacks and the campus community doesn't have setbacks. So it is kind of that that, you know, distinguishing between the two kind of like fields of the buildings and kind of what the community wanted to see between the two different areas of the site. Perfect. Thank you, Jason. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilmember Sandoval. All right. Giving it one last moment here. The public hearing is closed. Comments by members of Council on Council Bill 333. Council Member Flynn. Oh, thank you. Thank you, Madam President. You're hearing Sister Mary. Inspired me to open my remarks with something very special about this place. This is a this has been a four year journey that's been instrumental in reconnecting the Sisters of Loreto and the Loreto community to this sacred and beautiful space. They have been gone from the ownership and management of Loreto Heights for 30 years since they completed To Regis. And then. And we won't go into the. The Jesuits will leave the Jesuits at peace for right now, sister. They flipped it over to the Tokyo group out of Japan who ran taking on Loreto Heights for the next 30 years. And so the Loreto, the sisters and the Loreto community really have been connected to the campus for those 30 years and is one of the most beautiful things about this process, Madam President, is the fact that they are now once again an integral part of the fabric of the hides. And maybe if I could just take one moment. To disclose a thing that something that just happened today and that is the Department of Transportation and Infrastructure has agreed with our request, my request from my office and the Sisters of Loreto to use legacy naming for some of the streets that are contained entirely within the campus, rather than having them have the names from the surrounding grid to which they don't connect anywhere. We were faced. Some of you I mentioned, as we were faced with a prospect, if we followed the grid that this former Catholic Women's College would have a street on it named Hooker Street. And I have to commend Sister Mary now for a nun. She's got a great sense of humor. She said, well, if we have to have a hooker street, there has to be a street intersecting with that that's named Mary Magdalene. And I just thought that was a great, great sense of humor, sister. I really appreciate the broad support that the community, including the City of Sheridan, by the way, which closely borders a campus, as well as ten southwest Denver registered neighborhood organizations that supported the area plan two years ago and the seven that support this rezoning, one of them conditionally. I want to mention especially for thanks Jason Morrison, who was the lead is from Tennessee and the rest of the CBD team Jenny Button board from the Landmarking Office, Deirdre Oates who came in to to work with us tirelessly on this as well as the department heads, primarily Laura Andretti. Julia's likely from Dottie, a lawyer from CBD, Abbey Hanes from Parks and Recreation. But I think the most thanks goes to our neighborhood leaders and our residents who spent years hard hours hammering out a consensus that, while not unanimous, represents the top of the curve of what the community wants. Thanks, Sister Mary. Now in particular for constant involvement due to Annie Levinsky in historic Denver, our neighborhood leaders. Claire Harris. Tara Durham. Cassandra Cornelius. Donna Rip. Aaron Manhart. Richard Sides. Adriana Pena. Tony Hernandez. Others I'm sure to mystify. If I kept going, I'd leave some folks out. Madam President and colleagues, this site in Southwest Denver presents us in our part of town with our first major development project in a quarter century, which was Grant Ranch back in the nineties. This presents us with the opportunity to create the kind of community we've always said we want diverse in population, in household incomes, to combat displacement and gentrification, income, restricted, affordable rental and for sale housing, including, as you heard, required deep affordability levels of 60% and below and 30% and below multi bedroom units because we are a family neighborhood. Dedication of another parcel for and another affordable housing a project still to be selected. In fact, this is the approach to combating displacement and gentrification. Embedding permanently affordable income restricted units, along with Gene Myers could have mentioned this. I didn't hear it specifically, but some of the market affordable units that thrive will be building will be priced for less than some of the housing, some of the homes already in the existing neighborhood. So double the amount of open space that's required a revitalizing and landmarking the iconic destroyed buildings. This is the first housing development to use the Denver Green Code preservation of key view corridors both to and from the site height restriction so no building can ever overwhelm that beautiful Frank Ed Brooke, 1890 Loreto Academy Building Preservation of the cemetery where 62 sisters of Loreto have their eternal rest. Vision zero centered street design that places people first. One of the key things to know and that I quickly learned about this, Madam President, college going into a complicated and diverse issues such as the future of Loreto Heights, is that with so many competing needs and desires coming to the table, no one. Going gets everything they want, but everyone gets something they need. It takes a lot of intentional work for every party to this site to see how their specialized interests necessarily intersect with impact and affect the other parties. And that takes a lot of coordination and really, really wasn't easy. This was the first LDR project to go to. That first project, you go through that LDR process. My Southwest Denver community has been engaged with the potential changes on this campus since shortly after the college announced more than four years ago that it was closing and selling the land. Excuse me. Now, I hope that's not my time running out. That's my clock at the top of the hour. Long before the current owner came on the scene, we learned a lot about what the stakeholder group said, what they want to see, but more importantly, what they don't want to happen on the campus, too. With the first potential buyer that came along was a California developer who didn't even want a zoning change at all. He simply wanted to use the existing campus environments to match out nothing but residential. The campus zoning would have allowed around 10 million square feet of residential in buildings, up to 12 storeys, covering up to 60% of the land area compared to what could have been. What we have in front of us now is a clear path to a truly diverse, multi income, multi housing form, integrated community parks and trails, historic landmark preservation, deeply affordable housing. It will give my district four new landmark buildings. Joining are Fort Logan Field Officers quarters as the only Denver landmark buildings in Denver, west of the Platte and south of Sixth Avenue, a situation that I hope we work intentionally to change as time goes on. This hasn't been easy. The community came together to create the first specific neighborhood small area plan. In my district, the participation by the public was extraordinary 1300 unique participants over nearly a year. My office led the effort to increase that involvement by repeating the initial public meeting as a monolingual Spanish meeting that attracted 30 participants canvasing the Latinos serving businesses in the neighborhood. My office paid to leaflet for each meeting hanging fliers on one at one one occasion up to 13,000 doors throughout the Southwest and into Sheridan. The overwhelming community consensus was for a unique place that preserves the feel of the campus far into the future. As a result, many of the housing units, if you look at the residential building, many of those units face onto parts, puzzles or open spaces, as you might find on a campus in the summer of 2019, West Side allowed one of the RINO's to hold their summer picnic in the quadrangle. And as my wife and I sat there watching 5060 people enjoying a barbecue, the Denver Municipal Band Brass Quintet playing some yard games and whatnot. That place really came alive again, and if you had been there, you would have seen what the future of this special place can be when you come to Loreto Heights to live, work , play or hopefully attend a show in the revitalized May Montes Stanton Theater, you will know that you've entered a community where all are welcome. So building on the great respect for the past, to fulfill the spirit of Loreto that Mother Pan Croatia bought brought to this hilltop in 1918 88. Pardon me? I ask for the support of my colleagues for both the development agreement and the rezoning. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you. Councilmember Flynn. Up next, we have council member Clarke. Thank you, Madam President. Well, the land here is in Councilman Flynn's district. You know, college view, the neighborhood that is in my district. And in addition to being very important to a lot of my constituents, also a very important place for my family because we're out of heights is what brought my mom out to Denver. And so I won't go in and repeat. I know the hours late and we still have more work to do. I just want to echo all the things that Councilman Flynn already gave. And he he said it better than I could anyway. But I just want to add a thanks to Councilman Flynn for his just continued being plugged into every little piece of this all along the way with the community, with the developers, with the city staff all the way to the, you know, the the push to get these streets renamed in there and just really a service to the community that I represent and and to my family. And so I just want to say thank you, Councilman Flynn. And I'm very excited to support this tonight. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you. Councilmember Clark. Councilmember can each. Thank you. Council President My kudos to this community for coming together to hear a lot of testimony where there's consensus. Sometimes it's about convincing the council, but other times you can tell it's about the community celebrating what they've been through. I understand it might not have been universal, but it was overwhelming. And I just want to acknowledge that and just say how great it was. My kudos to Councilman Flynn and to the staff. My staff probably Kyle monitored much of this process and participated for my office and helped us answer questions and respond. But, you know, several times these negotiations over this development agreement hit impasse. And I just have to say to the developer team for stretching and staying at the table and hearing the feedback and understanding how important this was. Even the price differences between when you started negotiating this agreement and what they are today is is notable. And I hopefully, hopefully you feel like you understand more why the city pushed as hard as it did and to the city for continuing to advocate for for these high standards. Anyway, there were a lot of staff involved in this, and you are typically the unsung heroes. But I just want to sing you for a minute. This this was kind of a test project for a lot of things. And we had a developer who hadn't done a ton of affordable housing before. And so, you know, bringing in the partners and etc.. So, so to everybody who had to stretch to get to these outcomes. Thank you. And just stay at the table and get that easement done. All right. Thanks. The historic easement, that is. All right. Thank you, everyone, and congratulations. Thank you. I'll be supporting it tonight. He's right. Thank you, Councilmember. Coming up next, we have Councilmember Sandoval. Thank you, Madam President. Similar to Councilman Park, Colorado Heights is what my from my mom, from Minnesota to Denver. She graduated from greater heights and is a co member of Laredo Heights and retired, but now is working part time for the Sisters of Loretto. So I have heard all about this development from my mom and the numerous sisters that she works with, and they have had nothing but positive feedback to say. And as I was thinking about what to say, I'll just take a quote from their website. It says The Laredo community works for justice and peace as it educates the young and or serves the poor and marginalized, protects the environment and advocates for the voiceless. And I really believe that that's what this project does, and I really believe that's what this process has been. And so thank you. Councilman Flynn, I know we don't have very many rezonings in District two, so congratulations on a job well done. And me, I love the zoning code. And as I was digging through the application and seeing all of the details, it was really beautiful to see. You have requirements that I would like to see in school and tourist in my district where you don't have open, can you have back doors to the open space? You have front doors to the open space and you have requirements in these parties that I'll probably piece apart and make into another overlay in my council district. So thank you for leading that because that's exciting. That's something I've been saying I would like to do along the Platte River, along Lakewood Gulch and all the gotchas. So thank you for being a leader in that and creating new tools. And with that, I'll be supporting it. Very good. Thank you, Councilmember Sandoval. And not seen any other hands raised. I'll go ahead and make my comments here as we vote on Council Bill three, three, three, reminding folks that we also need to vote on 352 as well. But congratulations, Councilman Flynn, way back in 2019. I remember seeing Jason in our satellite space at the city and county building, and I kept asking, I'm like, What? What is this guy doing? Why is he always sitting back here in our satellite space? What the heck? And it was. You were doing your thing, Councilman Flynn. You were big and down into the details. You were making sure that this would be a development, that you could be proud of, that the community could be proud of. And I think the amount of speakers that spoke tonight in support shows that, and especially Sister Mary, Miss Guadalupe, a miss Lydia. They are the folks that in the speakers, this space and this sacred ground means so much to them. And change is not easy. It's never easy. And when you have folks that have deep ties to this site saying that they're supportive and that they believe in this process. You've done your work and you've done it well. And so I want to congratulate you, Councilman Flynn, and I am happy to support this this evening as well. And we will go ahead. Madam Secretary, roll call, please, on council Bill. Three, three, three. Flynn. I. Herndon i. Hinds. II. Cashman. I can each. I. Sandoval. I. Sawyer. I. Torres. I. Black. I see tobacco. Clark. I. Madam President. I. Madam Secretary, close the voting and announce the results.

A resolution approving a Second Amendment between the City and County of Denver and Hensel Phelps Construction Co. concerning the extension of construction management and general contracting services for the Great Hall Project at Denver International Airport. Amends a contract with Hensel Phelps Construction Co. by adding $900 million for a new total of $1.265 billion and 1721 calendar days for a new end date of 12-31-28 to continue to provide Construction Management and General Contracting (CM/GC) services for the Great Hall Project completion at Denver International Airport (202161481; 202053359-02). The last regularly scheduled Council meeting within the 30-day review period is on 1-18-22. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 12-15-21. Pursuant to Council Rule 3.7, Councilmember Ortega called this item out at the meeting on 1-3-22 for a one-week postponement to 1-10-22.

DenverCityCouncil_01032022_21-1516

No items have been called out under bills for final consideration. Councilmember Flynn has called out Bill 21, Dash 1493 for a vote under pending. No items have been called out. Madam Secretary, please put the first item on our screen. Thank you, Councilmember Ortega. Go ahead with your comments on resolutions 21, Dash 15, 16, 15, 17, 15, 18 and 15, 19, please. Thank you. Madam President, pursuant to Council Rule 3.7, I'm calling these resolutions out to postpone consideration until Monday, January ten. Over the last couple of weeks, I've had the opportunity to speak with our Bonn Council for the airport, as well as our legal advisor. And I want to thank Phil Washington, Crystal de Herrera and Mike Shanahan for their help and assistance in getting these meetings set up. You all received a copy of the questions that I asked in the answers that they provided in writing. I know some of you still had additional questions, and rather than debating all of that on the floor tonight, I thought it made sense for you all to have the opportunity to get your questions answered between now and next Monday so that when we bring it back, hopefully we have the votes to move it forward. I am very comfortable with the financial status of where we are. If you take into account the fact that we made it through a pandemic and never had to dip into our 500 plus days of cash that are on hand, and I kept looking for that unanticipated situation that might occur in the future and really feel comfortable that our team has done an amazing job in looking out for the fiscal health of our airport and making sure that we can not only do this, but still have those reserves that are needed to be able to move us forward to allow any of the future capital projects to be done, as well as the financing that is going to come forward this year. If you recall, in 2021, we did some interim restructuring of some of our financing and that will come back as permanent financing in 2022. So with all of that, we're still able to keep our cost per employment in in the middle of the range compared to all of the other airports and really believe that that's in large part to our consultants and our amazing staff that we have at the airport who constantly are looking out for the financial well-being of our airport. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Ortega. And as a quick reminder to folks in chambers and the public listening, our Rule 3.7 doesn't require a motion. Any councilmember can make that request of a resolution and pull it off the agenda for one week. We're going to go ahead and move on to Councilmember Flynn for comments. Thank you, Madam President. I join Councilwoman Ortega in. Making that request as well. So thank you, Councilwoman. I have had the benefit of a lot of briefings and information and data. And discussion. With the DIA team, and I really appreciate it. As I've said before. This is a this. Has been a difficult and troubled. Project. I compared it. At committee to we've gone in. And we've decided to remodel our kitchen and we find out halfway through, we're making mistakes. We need plumbing moved, we need whatever. We can't just stop in the middle. This is a project that needs to be finished and it needs to be finished the right way. It looks like the scope of this project is the right way. I want to remind folks who might be watching and folks here in the chambers that this is no longer the great mall project. That it was under the P3. We're not turning the gypsum terminal into a shopping center, but this is making the airport. The kind of airport we would have designed in the eighties and nineties when we conceived it. If we had known that 19 guys with box cutters were going to change the aviation industry. So this rearrangement and relocation of security is something I think this body has spoken pretty clearly needs to be done completely. This phase three would do that. The heartburn that a lot of us are having is simply with the price tag. And I just have a few more things that I. Need to. Understand. A little better. I see Mike back there and Crystal, thank you. You'll be hearing from. From us during the. Week. And so. Thank you, Madam President. I look forward to a final vote on this next week. All right. Thank you, Councilmember Flynn. And as a reminder, Council Resolutions 21, 15, 16, 15, 17, 15, 18 and 15, 19 will be back before Council for consideration on Monday, January ten. Madam Secretary, would you please put the next item on our screen? Councilmember Ortega You can go ahead with your questions on item 21, Dash 1523. Thanks, Madam President. This is a contract for our I.T. department. It's basically for our I.T. leadership team providing some technical and professional. It says programs.

Recommendation to receive and file the Citywide Strategic Plan on Early Childhood Education from the Health and Human Services Department. (Citywide)

LongBeachCC_10022018_18-0877

Thank you very much. Any more comments on this item? If not, please cast your vote. Now we'll go back to 21. Report from Health and Human Services recommendation to receive and file the city wide strategic plan on early childhood education from the Health and Human Services Department citywide. To purchase secondary schools. Yes, Mr. Vice Mayor, council members, we have a. Report from our Health and Human Services. Department, led by Kelly Collopy and her teammates. Good evening, Honorable Vice Mayor and city council members. Two years ago in the budget process, you are funded a. Half time early childhood. Education liaison for the Long Beach Health Department. This report stems from the work that they've been doing. It's been a strong partnership between the health department. Our early childhood education committee, and also our our school district. So with that, I'd like. To introduce you to Alejandro, Brian Rosette, who's our early childhood liaison. Coordinator, and she will. Give you an update on our strategic plan. Good evening on the role of vice mayor and city council members. My name is Dr. Alejandro Alvarado Moses, the city's early childhood education coordinator. I'm here to present the cities or the cities of long beaches, early childhood education strategic plan. This project was funded through a Pacific Gateway U.S. Department of Labor grant in alliance closely with the city's Long Beach Violence Prevention Plan and My Brother's Keeper plan, as well as Pacific Gateway, strengthening working families efforts. This plan outlines actionable strategies to support all young children in Long Beach. The Early Childhood Education Strategic Plan, identify programs, policies and systems recommendations that support children ages 0 to 5 to ensure they are ready to learn in kindergarten. Research shows that during the first few years of life, 700 new neural connections are formed every second. Laying the foundation for all future learning behavior and development experiences in early, in the early years starting at birth are critical in developing and predicting lifelong success. Children who have strong relationships with their caregivers, spaces that encourage lots of language development and who live in safe, healthy homes are more likely to have lifelong success. We also know that children who enter kindergarten behind their peers are less likely to be reading by third grade and less likely to graduate from high school. Thus, this focus on young children. The Department of Health and Human Services led the development of this plan with special insight from an ad hoc advisory group that included the Long Beach Early Childhood Education Committee and the Long Beach Unified School District. Developing this plan was truly a cross-sector collaboration to understand the strengths and gaps that exist in Long Beach for families raising young children. The Department of Health Staff held over 22 focus groups with parents, community partners, early childhood professionals, and even a group of young children . 19 key informant interviews were held with elected officials, including some of you here today. Parents and other professionals. A thing we heard from the conversations across Long Beach was that many social and economic factors are important for preparing young children for kindergarten. These include a lack of early childhood resources, overall difficulty in access and accessing resources that exist because of transportation, hours of operation, and the high cost of early childhood education programing. A need for parent training, building social connectedness for parents of young children, ensuring community safety and a need to focus on the whole child, not just education . A desire and a desire to ensure that children of all abilities and backgrounds are included in early childhood education programing. Parents and professionals also noted the need for affordable housing, a need for mental health, support for parents and children, and a need for everyone to understand the impact of early childhood on lifelong success. This plan is organized around a set of guiding principles that focus on strengths. Seek to remove barriers and ensure that all children in Long Beach and their families receive the respect and opportunities they need to succeed. The plan considers the whole child, which means that children's health, safety, social, physical, emotional and intellectual needs are addressed. The seven goal areas that were identified by professionals and parents are goal one to support and build strong and resilient families. Goal two to increase access and affordability of infant through pre-K care and education services. Goal three Increase access and affordability of infant through pre-K. Care and education services. Oh, sorry. Goal three to support the development of a stronger workforce for children. Goal four to improve quality of programs and services for birth through age eight. Goal five. To ensure that children of Long Beach live, learn and play and safe and healthy and accessible environments. Goal six To promote partnerships to address access to quality, basic needs and services. And Goal seven to strengthen the alignment of existing birth through age governance structures and early childhood support systems. Within these goals, there are over 100 activities that were developed based on the information gathered through the focus groups and interviews. We know that we cannot do this alone. The stakes are too high for our young children and our communities. Future. It will take all of us. The Department of Health and Human Services in partnerships with the Mayor's Fund for Education invite you and members of the community to enjoy to join us this Thursday at the Long Beach Day Nursery for a presentation of the plan and commit to being a part of the solution. We know that we all have a role in ensuring that all the children in Long Beach reach their full potential for success. Both the full plan and the executive summary can be found at WW w dot Long Beach dot gov forward slash ECP. Thank you for your time. That concludes my report and we are open for questions. Thank you, Councilman Franco. Thank you, SBA. I strongly support this program, obviously. The research is is is indisputable. Early childhood education really raises good kids. And it's an opportunity for us here in Long Beach to really get involved and engage in that aspects of our of our youth. We build strong communities. We build the strength of our kids. So I can certainly support this. And I look forward to the full. Length of the program in the strategic plan so that we could move this forward. On a side note. When I first started with the city back in a few years ago, we used to have early child development programs here in Long Beach through our parks and recreation programs. And unfortunately, over the years, through budget cuts and hard economic times, we had to restructure our our program, our parks programs and early childhood development went away. And I'm glad to see that we're making a comeback. And I'm looking forward to seeing it gained strength and continue to be an important, integral part of city services. So thank you very much for bringing this forward. Thank you. Congressman Ewing. That Councilman Richardson. Thank you, Vice Mayor. So Dr. Moses and entire health team. Kelly and the team, I think, you know, you've done a good job. You've done a great job once again. I think, you know, the traditional sense of what city should do has changed. There's a greater focus on the role of cities to lead on these broader social issues. You know, frankly, you know, there's there hasn't been really been leadership at higher levels of government or bureaucracy really slows it down. And so the real focus and the burdens been placed on cities to really move the needle. I think we've you know, we've talked about this through the work on things like My Brother's Keeper, acknowledging that, you know, there are important milestones to having a successful life, you know, from a health standpoint, an education standpoint, an economic standpoint. And some of those milestones are literally directly linked to early childhood education. Reading by third grade, the key switch from learning to read to reading to learn. So the the, the better and more strategic we are about being intentional about these focuses, then it will have long term downstream impacts on all of our services. We know that. And so I really love that we have this strategic plan. I look forward to, you know, better understanding how me as a policymaker, how I can help to support the systems change involved with this. And I look forward to ensuring that we keep that lens on early childhood education with all the rest of our decisions in terms of sort of our parks, recreation, our health departments, our libraries, how we can really work together toward that goal. So I spoke a little more than I initially thought I would. But, you know, I read to my kids when I get in early enough and it's something that doesn't come naturally to me. It's something that I have to work toward. And we have a team and we're trying to build an environment, a culture to support that. Right. And I think that the more we can model this as a city, the better habits and behavior we can do. And I tell you, there's just so many opportunities from the fatherhood initiative that you're doing to, you know, all the work in our libraries and My Brother's Keeper. I just think this is really incredible and strategic. So thank you for your work. Thank you. Spears. Thank you. I want to echo my council colleagues sentiments. I you know, your presentation was great, but it still doesn't give the weight to the work that the vision and the plan. I just think that continuing to talk about this weekly, continuing to talk about how we're implementing this as much as we can and really having this lens on everything that we do when we talk about investing in our children, when we talk about public safety and how important it is to cities, when we talk about economic development and how important it is to cities, it doesn't matter what we do on the back end if we're not investing in early childhood development. And so I really just I want to echo the comment, particularly around the role of cities. And I know that some of us might have a different understanding of the role of cities. My work at Lane, a nonprofit for a decade, it really was under the the understanding that cities is where change happens. Cities is where we can get our hands in there and really make change, that people can feel that impact. And then when we start leading in cities, that that change goes up. And so looking through this, a couple of things that I just wanted to to highlight for folks. You know, 9813 is one of the zip codes in my district. And it says that a few miles away from 90803 in zip code 90813, the percentage of children under 18 living in poverty increases to 46.1%. We talk about equity a lot. And I know sometimes it's a it's a word that can trigger us to feel divisive on the council. That number right there, 46.1% of children are living in poverty. One zip code over that is what we talk about when we talk about equity. That is what we talk about. We talk about investing in our children and how how do we have an impact on public safety? How do we make sure our city is thriving and in changing and recognizing that that's a problem is the very first step. And so I just I think this is a wonderful lens to be able to look at how we govern. I know that some of us on the council have talked about initiatives for children, and I want to recognize the families that are here tonight with their children, because we know that it's now 830, so I'm not going to talk extremely much longer, but that this is a time when you should be at home reading to your kids. Right, or your kids are going to bed. So I want to thank you guys and know that at the city level, we are looking at opportunities for us to have child care on key nights and we have issues where we might have families. And so that is coming soon and I'll be there on Thursday. And I want to just echo again any opportunity with any item that we have come forward where we can talk about investing in youth and in families. I expect that this council will fully support and I look forward to partnering. Thank you guys very much. Thank you. Councilman Gonzalez. I just want to say thank you as well to Kelly, Alejandro and your team for doing this really great work. I know I had been interviewed for this. And, you know, similar to what Councilmember Pearce said, you know, we don't like to highlight the negative attributes of the city and the things that we like to work on . But they're the reality oftentimes and I happen to represent and I know when three and that has been a really big not only challenge for our city but it's also been a very big priority for me to ensure that all the students in 98 went through all the kids and families really have opportunities and this provides goals and a real good baseline because we can talk about park equity and digital inclusion without really starting with a baseline for for the work. And I think that this report absolutely does that. So thank you very much for that work. And you know, in that regard, I spoke a lot about greenspace and access for kids. So in addition to early education and the goals we have here, it's like, what are they doing after school? What are they doing during the weekends? How can we really supplement a lot of the work we're doing in the early education realm with other policies that really help that? And I just had the pleasure of congratulating UN Mundo, the Amigos, the right in central Long Beach on 14th and Long Beach Boulevard. They just celebrated ten years. They offer free daycare and a very high quality daycare and I'm really proud to have that in my district. So thanks again for your work. Thank you very much. Councilwoman Gonzalez, any public comments on this item? Please state your name. Hello. My name is Andrew. Hello, Mayor. In the City Council. My name or face me or say my name is Enjoyment of HANO, a community organizer with Long Beach Forward supporting the best art central Long Beach Initiative, which is comprised of residents, families and service organizations with a focus on children ages zero through five. We have supported collaborative spaces such as the Home Visitation Collaborative and also the Long Beach Child Abuse and Neglect Network. Several of our leadership team members are here today, along with our partnership members. Some of them had to go home and everything, and some of you may actually know some of them. But these are some of the most dedicated parents I have ever came across. And I think that is shown by their commitment of staying here for over 3 hours with their children who are so tired and ready to go home and sleep. Some of them actually just left. I'm sorry. We work to ensure central Long Beach is a community where babies, children and their families are healthy and safe with the passion for life and learning. We are here to show support for the city wide early childhood education strategic plan. Several of these goals, such as increasing access and affordability of early care and education services and improve the quality of birth through age eight. Programs and services are exactly what central Long Beach needs for our community to thrive. We look forward to working with you in the future to see these goals through. Special shout out and thank you to Kristina Boatright, who is also on our leadership team, and Alejandro Moses and the countless of others who've worked on this plan. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker. Good evening, Honorable Vice Mayor and members of the City Council. My name is Whitney Leathers, executive director for the Long Beach Day Nursery and chair for the Long Beach Early Childhood Education Committee. I'm so excited to be here tonight. More excited than you can probably tell. This plan has been long in the making and it's been a true partnership. I'm here to thank you for your support of the Early Childhood Strategic Plan and for the support of staff support from the Health Department to make this come to fruition. This plan didn't come alone as a solo effort. It came with an inclusive community, partners and process. In the creation of this plan, as you saw above with is the focus groups and what have you. We came together as a diverse group of stakeholders, and the outcome is an inclusive plan greater than we could have anticipated. As you've heard, research supports early education is key to college and career success. This plan, I'm so proud to say, not only addresses the needs of our children, but also the necessary resources and supports for our workforce and families in order for them to be successful. It's a real four feet to create this plan as a community, and the momentum around it is palpable. Now the real excitement lies within what's next implementation and expanding programs and services to young children and families. We look forward to continuing our work with the Health Department on the shared programs and events that we host, such as the Week of the Young Child, the Early Childhood Symposium and the Early Learning Festivals. We also look forward to adding to these supports, as you'll see in this strategic plan. The success of this plan will take a collaboration of partners many city departments, the ECB committee and the Long Beach Unified School District. We look forward to building these partnerships with the charge before us and meeting the goals in the plan. Before I say thank you, I want to acknowledge all of you for seeing the importance in early childhood education. LLENA Councilmember John Gonzalez In our district, I have a site and I know 813 and we're working on expansion so that we can support children and families more. We also have a site that will be hosting on Thursday and I'm excited to see many of you there and I can't wait to continue the work with our partners. So thank you so much for your ongoing support for early childhood education. I look forward to continued engagement as we move forward with the implementation over the next five years. Thank you. Thank you very much. And you know, I myself truly support this this item because the fact that my chief of staff every Saturday, she's with her little child at every one of our cleanups. So I'm just letting you know. Mrs. Mongo, get ready. Yes. Thank you very much. Would you like to take the vote, please? Now we're going to move on to item 19.

A bill for an ordinance approving a proposed purchase by the City and County of Denver (“City”) of insurance coverage from: Kaiser Foundation Health Plan of Colorado; United Health Care Insurance Company; Denver Health Medical Plan, Inc.; Delta Dental of Colorado; Standard Insurance Company of Colorado, Inc.; Vision Service Plan Insurance Company. Approves the recommended 2018 changes to City and County of Denver healthcare benefit plans. The Committee approved filing this bill by consent on 7-25-17.

DenverCityCouncil_08072017_17-0825

Hopefully that can come to me through other channels. And because of this concern now I will actually now I should probably call it out for a vote so I can abstain based on this information. Late information. Yep. So. Mr. President, I hope that. Oh, yeah, that's. That's my. That's my part. Madam Secretary, how would you like to do this on a final consideration? So do you. You want to vote? I do now. Yeah. He wants to put it on the floor. Okay. That can be done. Yeah. Okay. So, Councilwoman Gilmore, please put 825 on the floor for funding consideration and do pass. Thank you, Mr. President. I move that council bill 825 be placed on final consideration and do pass. All right. It's been moved and seconded. Councilman, you made your comment. Madam Secretary, roll call. Sorry. Espinosa staying. Flynn. I. Gilmore. I. Herndon. I. Cashman. Abstain. Kennedy. Lopez. I knew. I'm sorry. Was that a no? Huh? I. Ortega, I. Sussman, I. Black eye. Clark, I. Mr. President. I. All right, please close the voting. Announce the results. Lebanese two abstentions. 11 eyes, two abstentions. Eight. 25 has passed. Okay. All right, Councilwoman Gilmore. Uh, Madam Secretary, please bring up the next items. 823 824 826 in a block.

Recommendation to decrease FY 20 appropriations in the General Fund Group in the Citywide Activities Department by $2,350 to reflect the use of the Ninth Council District One-time District Priority Funds for donations to various organizations.

LongBeachCC_03172020_20-0231

We are moving on to the next item. Madam Clerk, if you can please read, the next item we are going to do is item 17. Communication from Council Member Richardson. Recommendation Greece Decrease F 20 appropriations in the General Fund group by 2352 reflect the use of the ninth Council District one time district priority funds for donations to various organizations. Councilmember Richardson. Rex Richardson. Move the item. Can I get a second? Tauranga City Centers. There is no public comment. Will do a roll call vote. District one. I just talked to. I District three. High District four. By. District five. By District six. And. So are the six seven. By District eight. District nine, District nine.

A bill for an ordinance vacating a portion of right-of-way near 1750 15th Street, with reservations. Vacates a portion of the public right-of-way on the southeasterly corner of Wewatta Street at 15th Street, with reservations, at 1750 15th Street in Council District 9. The Committee approved filing this bill by consent on 12-13-16.

DenverCityCouncil_01092017_16-1274

Okay. Do a quick recap on the resolutions. I have no bill called out on bills for introduction. I have. Councilman Espinosa has called out Council Bill 1274 just for comment. And under bills for final consideration, Councilwoman, each has called out Bill 919 for a technical amendment. Is that correct? Correct. Okay, great. Madam Secretary, can you please pull up council bill 1274? Great, Councilman. Go ahead and make your comment. I'm sorry. I just. When I was looking at this. One of the things that concerns me is this is effectively a rezoning without consideration by planning board nor public notification and comment. So, well, I'm not going to interfere with the process because it is what it is. I have asked to meet with the developer to ascertain how they intend to address the zoning requirements with proposed future development and the public realm prior to next week's final consideration. Thanks. Okay. Angela Cassius, can you can you come up here? I just I just want to ask a quick question. This. This counts. Oh, this is so great. I'm telling you, I love it every time it comes up. So this is actually a sidewalk vacation, correct? It's a right of way vacation. So there is an easement to keep the sidewalk in tact. Okay. So so will there be any disruption to the sidewalk at all? No. Okay. And tell me about the public process, because this they go out to all neighborhood organizations. Correct. So there is a public process associated with all vacations. And so we notify the public in a couple of different ways. There's actual sign posted in the location with a contact information for the city so that if people have have questions or concerns, they can email the city. We also contact all of the, I guess, touching neighborhood organizations as part of the process in addition to all of the utility companies. Okay, great. And I'm just making sure and I know this is right in this area, there is a design review committee in this LaDonna area. So these folks will have to go before a design review board as well, right? I believe so, yes. All right. Thank you. Okay? Yeah. My best to speak. Oh, you're in there. Councilman Espinosa is in the. In the queue here. Yeah. So just so it's clear why based on the comments there. I that's what I meant by sort of it's sort of run of the mill in this sort of kind of request that is being made. If the reason why, I just want the public to sort of know the reason why I say it's sort of an effective reasoning is if you're familiar with the building adjacent to this property that houses the Q Hills restaurant, that building is subject to a setback or a step back requirement. So if that building is five storey, well, probably seven storeys or eight storeys along the street. And then at that point, it's supposed to step back 25 feet. And then the just the roof, the remaining storeys go up. And that's the requirement of zoning when you effectively claim through vacation the sidewalk area and move your property line from the to the alignment with the Ku Hill's building out to the curb line, that then effectively moves the bulk closer to the all the historic property line. And so that wouldn't be this sort of building in that area would not be allowed in the parcel as in the zone lot as defined today. But when you move in, you make the property bigger, you're you're set back requirement is based on the property line . Therefore you're now able to step back. I mean, you're able to capture your step back requirement over that sidewalk that you're not using. And so it will result in bottom line is it will result in a different massing that could be built right on that corner after the zone, meaning after the vacation of the of the sidewalk and the subsequent easement, then you could do today as a use by right. And so the good thing is, is yeah, it is subject to design review. So you get a little more scrutiny on what the finished product is than you would in a lot of other parts of the city. The majority of the city. But it is it is it is one of those things that it wouldn't be clear when you're talking about simply a ride away vacation, you don't know how that's going to actually subsequently influence the mass of a building that goes next to it.

The Council will meet in executive session for the purpose of receiving legal advice. Rachelle Hill, City Attorney’s Office

DenverCityCouncil_09232019_19-1006

Outcomes. Well, 913 with its public hearing has been postponed to Tuesday, November 12th. We have do have an executive session tonight. So I will move that council enter into an executive session session for the purpose of receiving legal advice. If I can get a session moved and seconded. Per Section 2-34a of the Denver Revised Municipal Code, a two thirds affirmative vote is required to enter into executive session. Madam Secretary, roll call. Black CdeBaca I. Flinched. I heard it. I hands. High. Cashman. Kenny Ortega. Sandoval, I. Sawyer, I. Torres, I. Mr. President. Hi, Madam Secretary. Please. Because voting announced results. 12. Hours, 12 eyes council will now enter into executive session. When we return, then we will return to adjourn the meeting. Thank you. You know. Bank. And then their bank actually said, Yeah, the check is good and the person lost money that way. So that's a good warning. But the other the other one that I want to just play at the end of the refund from the company is that you may be told you're virus protection software. The company contract is being canceled. You are going to get a refund on this. And what they the caller will then see is that they have accidentally transferred too much into your account and will say, oh, no, I'm going to lose my job. But, you know, would you help me out here and we'll ask you to go get the balance so they'll say they've transferred more. So, for instance, if if you're getting to $200 or so, they'll say, well, actually, you know, I've I've transferred $10,000. Could you pay me 9800 back so that I don't lose my job? And again, that's you know, that's one that can easily in an urgent situation can can easily fox people. In Nigeria. You know the Nigerian prince I'm hoping he'll come over here some day. I'd like to meet him. The funniest thing was I did some research into that and I discovered that that's a really that's like a really old scam because I guess some of these have been circulating for hundreds of years. Right. And they had some letters about a Spanish prince. So a long time ago, it was a Spanish prince who was imprisoned. And you could help help help him regain his fortune by contributing to his his release. So, yeah, we'd all like to meet him, sir. Yes. I want to share with the community in terms of coming from a real estate perspective. If you know of anyone who's buying a home, you're they're getting scammed by wire fraud in terms of what they need to bring the closing. And you have scammers out there that has that will capture the home buyers email and send them an email saying that the title company is instructing you to wire your closing funds to this account. And it's not true. So I don't know if you've been seeing that, but in real estate, it's been that's one of the highest levels of scams right now is to wire fraud for a closing settlement. And so I encourage if you know of anybody who's look who's buying a house and at closing, call the title company themselves. They will tell you how much they need to bring to closing. And since I'm in real estate, I just got to say this. No, please do. I think these are great tips for. Working with senior homeowners that the scammers you will get mail. You get mail at your house and it looks like it's coming from your mortgage company, the graphics, the logo and what's been happening. They're seeing they know that you're paying a mortgage and they were saying, now your loan has been transferred. You pay us at this address. Please don't do that. Call your mortgage company to verify if your. Loan has been. Transferred. So it's it's incredible. It's a lot going on right now. There really is. And thank thank you. Great tips as well. You know, I don't know how much time we've got left. And I I apologize to folks who are watching on channel that I know we've been skipping around with lots of people adding to the discussion. But I think it is really important and I really appreciate it because I think it's only by hearing from other members of our own community that we really know what's happening in our neighborhood, that we really know what's happening in our city, and that we we work to best protect ourselves. So I'm I'm just going to finish up here by just just letting letting, you know, I guess, finally what what we can do for you. So we do have folks who we've I put some resources on the table here and we have folks who actually answered the phone. Real people, not a phone tree. Isn't that amazing? So we have real folks who are there to deal with your problems every day during the week. And if you have concerns that something's a fraud, then you can check it out with them. If you're sure that you've been defrauded, you can call them. Obviously, you can also call local law enforcement. Maybe sometimes you want to talk to somebody who's in the DA's office who's a fraud specialist. So we're there to do that sort of work for you. Also, we can sometimes get rapid solutions to situations. So I can I can promise that happens in every case. But I will tell you that when we look in, when we start looking into a situation, it's amazing to me that that will sometimes resolve things very swiftly because they know that we're looking at the situation. So, you know, we are super motivated to meet with the community. So for any of you who also are members of other groups and you would like to invite us to come work with your group and to come talk to your group. We love to do that. We really would love to do that as you can. You might not be able to see, but I think I've only got through about a quarter of my presentation this morning. But I think it's really more important, as I said, that we we talk we talk about things. But there is a lot more, I guess, where this came from. And it's sad, right? It's sad that there's so many different scams that we are we're needing to take more than than this time simply to get through the most frequent ones for people. So just once again, thank you to Councilwoman Gilmore. Thank you to all of you for coming out. I hope it's been something that's been useful to you and it's been a delight to be here. Thanks. Well, thank you, Jane. We really appreciate you being here. And Mr. Paul. Yes, I think you have a microphone right right there. I don't need my. Okay. I just like. Your office for putting this on quite as. Well. Oh, I. I think they still want you to use the microphone here so we can make sure that and that's always okay to repeat. I just want to thank you, Councilwoman and Gilmore, of you and for putting this on with Mrs. and White Vermont below 2020 because this is needed more of this is needed because it's all I mean you know, it's amazing. I was just listening this lady here talk about, you know, the game this man pulled and I asked, is he alive yet? She said the lady didn't have a gun. Well. Well, well, we definitely thank you, Mr. Poole, and thank you for everybody being here this morning. And I would be remiss if I did not sincerely thank my Bello 2020 and Montebello Walks and the Golden Age Club for getting you here and getting the word out. Mark Bello 2020, is a registered neighborhood organization and very active in the neighborhood. And I know that there's other groups out there as well that we just need to get this info out to the broader community. And then the Colorado Trust also provided our breakfast and refreshments this morning. And Montebello Walk is an organization that also is very active in the neighborhood and they get seniors out and keep you active. And so at the end of the day, when we start talking about what our next steps are, I what I got out of Jane's presentation is you need to verify if someone calls you and nothing is ever that urgent. And it's okay to take those folks information down and hang up the phone, don't give them any information and turn around and call the district attorney's office. Call our council office, call the non-emergency police number and start asking questions. And so verify, verify, verify. And this is the first of a series of Montebello Speaks speakers bureaus that we're going to be facilitating in the neighborhood. And so look for other topics that we're going to talk about. If you have ideas of topics that you would like to have an expert come in and share information and we want to keep this a conversation. So always back and forth. Because what you're asking today and the answers that are being recorded, this is going to go out on Channel eight and get out to the broader community. And so I thank you for being the leaders that you are in the my fellow community and District 11, and we will keep this going. So thank you. From the District 11 Council Office and Montebello Leadership Cabinet present. The second edition of Montebello Speaks in partnership with the Office of Financial Empowerment and the Denver Office on Aging. Good evening. I'm Stacey Gilmore, and I'm the councilwoman who represents District 11. And I'm honored to welcome you tonight to a Montebello Speaks Speakers Bureau event. We have been working for the last three years with community members in the Montebello neighborhood to talk about the effects of gentrification, involuntary displacement, what we really need to have in our neighborhoods to make sure that our seniors can age in place, that you have the financial planning and resources to make sure that you're able to transfer your asset on to your children so that we're looking at generational wealth building as well. And so thank you so much for being here tonight. And at our second event, we started these recorded events to make sure that we were getting the information out far and wide throughout the community. We know that sometimes you can't come to a neighborhood meeting and so we wanted to have these available on Channel eight. We're going to post them on YouTube and we would like you to share them with your friends and family and other folks as well, so that they've got this information. And so tonight, we're going to be talking about financial consumer protection. There's a lot of folks out there that are maybe not on the up and up. And so we want to make sure that you have the tools to make good decisions. And I would like to first thank the Montebello Leadership Cabinet. It's a group of registered neighborhood organization leaders, community leaders who have been so committed to this work. And when we sat down and started talking about our changing neighborhood, the top things that came up were affordable housing, allowing our seniors to age in place, but then financial empowerment and financial literacy. And so through your voice and your advocacy, we're able to do these events. I also want to thank the Office of Financial Empowerment and the Office on Aging. And we also have Perla Geisler, who is here tonight. And she brought out the Denver Connex mobile van, which is a brand new resource that's in partnership with the city and county of Denver and Mayor Hancock's office to make sure that you have the resources right in your own neighborhood. And so it's a mobile van, and it's for older adults. It provides resources and real time advice to you. And so hopefully we'll get a chance to, after this taping, go out and check out that resource as well. With the Montebello Leadership Cabinet. We are always trying to grow the membership because there are so many different topics and so many opportunities for people to learn more that we want to make sure that you get involved as well. And so if you are watching this on television, if you're here tonight, please get involved with Montebello Leadership Cabinet. You can contact me or any of my staff members. And with that, we're going to go ahead and get started. The presentation is Financial Consumer Protection and is presented by the Denver Office of Financial Empowerment. And the two gentlemen that are going to be with us here tonight are Alvin Tafoya. He's the program manager. And Ron O'Hara, the Consumer Financial Protection coordinator, again for the Office of Financial Empowerment. Here you go, Alvin. Thank you. How's everybody doing this evening? Doing good. I just want to go through a quick exercise just to kind of get a feel of the room and just to really engage you. How many of you receive some kind of banking credit score or loan training or class when you were in high school? Okay. Got one here. How about while you were in college? How many of you learned these about these things through your parents? Do they systematically teach you all that when you're grown up? We got a few more hands up. So basically the Office of Financial Empowerment really wants to take all the guesswork out of that. It shouldn't be an organic process in which you grow up. You start learning about banking and you start learning about checking. You start learning about how important your credit score is and how that could impact you financially. So. You know. So that's really what we're engaged in and what we do. We serve families, we serve individuals. We actually serve small businesses as well. We want to empower them to be able to make sound financial decisions so that they can become successful. And so with that, I'm going to go ahead and move forward with the presentation and give you a little bit of background about how we started and where we came from. So Mayor Michael Hancock supported us back in 2013, along with our council members. City council members supported us and they have been supporting us ever since. Basically what we have been able to do since then is grow our program from what it was to what it is today. Today we're serving about nine. We have nine coaching centers throughout the city and county of Denver. You can walk in or call them and set up an individual appointment. They'll provide you coaching sessions and teach you about all the banking type of products and how to get your arms around your finances. Some of the things that we do or we'll help people better understand their credit, will help them to reduce their debt. We'll also provide them small loans if they need to. And we're also working with other financial institutions, large banks and small credit unions to develop banking products that help support low to moderate income families. And so we're really working on helping individuals at any place in their life span to move forward and kind of discuss what you talked about, get to a place where you can do some wealth development and transfer wealth onto your family so that they can kind of go through this too gen process and move that forward. Like I said, Mary Hancock supported us back in 2013 along with city council. Ultimately, you know, our job is to work with residents economic mobility, stabilize families, individuals and small businesses. We forgot that in this PowerPoint, but I wanted to throw that out there. Develop solutions through programs, policies and practices to stabilize families and individuals. And so one of the things we worked on was Prop 111 to help reduce the amount that a lender's payday loan centers can charge an individual for a payday loan. And so today, because that law was passed, they can only charge up to 36%. And we still think that's a little bit high. But we're working on an alternative product so that we can work with individuals, which is ultimately the goal, to get them into banking products that they're eligible for. So you guys are probably the first to hear this in the community. We used to be the Office of Financial Empowerment, but now we're the Office of Financial Empowerment and Protection. And the reason why we moved to protection is because Ron's going to come up in a little bit and discuss the consumer fraud and protection division that we we're putting together right now. So you guys have actually kind of learned about it the first time we met with you. We're continuing to move that forward and we're going to roll that out here pretty soon. And so a little bit about the program, the ecosystem here, the five pillars of financial stability.

A bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification for 1090 South Dayton Street in Windsor. Approves a map amendment to rezone property from S-SU-I to OS-B (suburban to open space), located at 1090 South Dayton Street in Council District 5. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 9-14-21. Community Planning and Development has determined that the requirement for a legal protest (signatures by the owners of 20 percent or more either of the area of the lots included in the proposed change or of the total land area within 200 feet from the perimeter of the area proposed for change) has been met (petition signatures represent 0% and 31%, respectively).

DenverCityCouncil_11082021_21-1030

We have two public hearings tonight for those participating in person. When called upon, please come to the podium on the presentation monitor. You will see your time counting down for those participating virtually when called upon. Please wait until our meeting hosts promote you to speaker. When you are permitted, your screen will flash and say Reconnecting to meeting. Please don't leave the meeting. You will be reconnected and willing to turn on your camera. If you have one and your microphone, you will see your time counting down at the bottom of your screen. Once you've finished speaking, you will change back to participant mode and see your screen flash one more time. All speakers should begin their remarks by telling the council their names and cities of residence and if they feel comfortable doing so, their home addresses. If you've signed up to answer questions, only state your name and note that you are available for questions of council speakers. It will have 3 minutes. There should be no yield in of time. If translation is needed, you will be given an additional 3 minutes for your comments to be interpreted will alternate between in-person and virtual for efficiency by calling in-person participants and then alternating to virtual participants. Speakers must stay on the topic of the hearing and must direct their comments to the council members. Please refrain from profane or obscene speech. Direct your comments to council as a whole, and please refrain from individual or personal attacks. Councilmember Cashman, will you please put Council Bill 1030 on the floor for final passage? Yes, Council President. I move that council bill 21 dash 1030 be placed upon final consideration and do pass. Thank you. It has been moved and seconded. The required public hearing for Council Bill 1030 is open. May we have the staff report and we have Libby Adams here. Yes, thank you. Okay. So I think you council president and council. I'm Libby Adams of Community Planning and Development and I'll be presenting the MAP Amendment at 1090 South Dayton Street. So this application is located in Council District five in the Windsor neighborhood. This two acre site is located on the northeast corner of Mississippi Avenue and Dayton Street, at the edge of the city near Arapahoe County. The applicant is requesting to rezone from U to open space B, which allows for parks and open spaces not owned or operated by the city. And the applicant plans to locate a private outdoor swim club on the site. So as stated previously, this property is currently zoned suburban single unit. IE this allows for single unit civic, institutional and educational uses in the suburban house building form and requires a minimum zone. Lot of 12,000 square feet. The site is currently vacant, although there are single unit land uses to the north, east and south and then there's a school just to the west. So this slide shows the existing building form and scale with the subject property on the bottom left hand side. You can see the school that's in Arapahoe County on the top left, and then to single unit homes in both Denver and Arapahoe counties. So a postcard notifying property owners within 200 feet of the site was sent out on July 1st. And then on September 1st. This went to planning board where one resident spoke in opposition and planning board recommended unanimously to recommend approval. So to date, staff has received 15 comment letters in opposition of the proposed rezoning and a statement of opposition signed by 69 residents. The concerns were mostly regarding traffic and the site receiving access from Emporia Street. The Denver Department of Transportation and Infrastructure typically requires access from the street with the lowest classification. So in this case, Emporia Street, which is the local street, as this will create less vehicle conflict points. Other comments cited concerns about wastewater and storm drainage in the area and that this property should be developed under the existing single unit zoning. And so at the time of development, the applicants will need to demonstrate that on site in an onsite drainage report that no adverse impacts to the historic drainage patterns will occur as a result of the development. And additionally, I want to note that traffic and wastewater impacts are typically reviewed at the time of site development plan when a specific development is proposed, and then the Council offers recommended mediation and hopes the applicant could reach a good neighbor agreement with the neighbors regarding these concerns around traffic. And when the applicant expressed their interest interest in mediation, when the mediator reached out to them. However, neighboring property owners were unwilling to participate in the mediation process, so it did not move forward. And then a successful protest petition has been submitted, which requires an affirmative vote from ten council members for this rezoning. So, you know, as briefly stated previously, any potential side impacts that are related to a specific development project will be reviewed at the time of site development plan. So at that time, transportation engineers will identify if mitigation measures are required for a particular project. So kind of moving to the rezoning. The Denver zoning code has five review criteria that must be met in order for rezoning to be approved. The first criterion is consistency with adopted plans, and there are two plans that are applicable to the site. This rezoning meets several of the goals and comprehensive plan 2040, but I'll just mention a couple. It will improve access to resources that improve quality of life, and it will promote development where if infrastructure is already in place. And then Blueprint identifies the future neighborhood context as suburban and parks and open spaces are important and necessary land uses within all of our neighborhood contexts. They are also found in all of our neighborhood contexts, and they help make our city neighborhoods complete. And then Blueprint identifies the future place type as low residential, so similar to the suburban single unit districts which make up most of low residential areas. OSB allows for civic, institutional education, cultural park and open space, and then public and religious assembly uses and then Mississippi Avenue and is a residential arterial south Dayton is identified as a residential collector and then Emporia Street as a local street. And residential streets are primarily residential uses, but also may include schools, civic uses, parks and small retail nodes, which is consistent with the OSB zoned district and then the growth area strategy and blueprint. Denver is all other areas of the city, so this is where we expect to see 10% of employment growth and 20% of housing growth by 2040. So by allowing active and passive recreation uses on the site, that will increase job growth by a limited amount. Staff also finds the requested rezoning meets the next two criteria. The rezoning will result in uniformity of district regulations and will further the public health, safety and welfare by enabling more opportunities for recreation uses and allowing a park use which are compatible with the surrounding residential uses. Staff finds there is a justifying circumstance for this MAP amendment. With the new infill development found in both Denver and Arapahoe counties creating a greater need for more recreation opportunities. And lastly, the proposed zoning is consistent with the open space contexts and the specific intent of the OSB district. So based on the review criteria, staff recommends approval of this requested MAP amendment. And that concludes my presentation. All right. Thank you for a great presentation, Libby. And it looks like we have nine speakers, nine individuals signed up this evening. All of them are joining us online. And our first speaker is Joseph Skinner. And we know, Joseph, you're online and we have a Lydia Skinner. And so if you can raise your hand, if that's you, Joseph, we'll go ahead and get you moved over. Okay. You can go ahead, Jason. Good evening. I'm Joseph Skinner, and I'm here with my wife, Lydia Skinner. We. We're the applicants for the rezoning of 1090 South eighth Street from SW single district to OSB open space. I'm standing on individuals. We're not associated with any large organization and are under contract on this undeveloped parcel located within District five with the intention of creating a seasonal outdoor swim club as a proposed use. Our vision is to build a community asset that would include an open air pool, children's ward, a pool area greenspace and a community space for gathering is for Memorial Day to Labor Day. Each year we want to create a community oasis that can be thought of as an extension of one's own backyard. Rezoning from SSI to OSB will promote infill development where infrastructure and services are already in place. We believe changing conditions in the area provided justifying circumstance because there are significant numbers of new infill residences in both Denver and Arapahoe County and a demand for more recreation option opportunities. Rezoning to OSB will allow for more park and recreation uses in this growing area. While there are other rezoning designations that we could have potentially fit our proposed use, we believe Open Space Recreation District is the most appropriate and shows our commitment to investing in the community. In terms of community. Engagement, where we socialize the rezoning proposal with council menswear and the President and the Range V Neighborhood Association, Roger Miller at the beginning of May, we also mail the letter to each home in the R.A. to introduce ourselves the rezoning and proposed use, as well as invite interested individuals to meet with us in person at the parcel to learn more. This informal meeting took place on May 20th. We also reached out to the Chan School across the street, and the school district expressed written interest in entering a joint use agreement with us to utilize each other's parking as overflow. This coincides while given that our operational months would be opposite, the outdoor swim club would be open when school's out for summer and closed when school is in session. After the first hearing, when neighbors writing concerns over increased traffic, we met on three separate occasions with the mediator that Councilwoman Soaries offers put us in contact with. We were open to having a discussion with the neighborhood as a whole and in particular with the residents who submitted concerns. However, the few residents in opposition opted not to engage in mediation from both the informal meeting with residents and multiple one on one conversations with neighbors over the past several months. We have received positive feedback and excitement at the rezoning and proposed use. In conclusion, we are excited at the prospect of creating an asset for the Windsor community by rezoning from SSI to SB. And we thank you all for your time. Thank you. Our next speaker this evening is Jackie Boyer. Can you hear me? Yes. Okay. My name is. Good afternoon, counsel. My name is Jackie Beauregard. I reside in District five. I've been a homeowner in the range neighborhood for over 40 years. This is an area located adjacent to the High Line Canal Trail and 15 to 20 minutes for most of the minutes. Jim here to. I and many of my neighbors chose to leave here because of the fighting feel of the neighborhood, the high line trail and the family friendly Bean Basin Park. There's a park, has trees, green grass, lounge or play on grills and a children's play area. The applicant seeking the change wrongly believe that changing to OSB would be adding value to our community. There is no way that a zone change from SS youth on to OSB would be beneficial to range view. We, the voters of Denver spoke loud and clear on November 2nd. We want our voices to be heard when our neighborhoods of being. We imagine constituents want to have a say about what would, should or could be done in our neighborhoods. We do not want decisions made for us under the guise of what is good for us and or the city. I implore all of you to please vote no on 21. 1030. Thank you for this. Thank you. Our next speaker joining us online is David Hagan. Okay. It looks like we don't have David Hagan on. So we'll go to our next speaker, Tony Miller. Yes. Can you hear me? Yes. Thank you. My name is Tony Miller and I live in. Denver at 980 South Emporia, adjacent to the 1090 South Dayton property. I've never previously. Opposed any rezoning efforts anywhere, but. This time I feel compelled to. Prior to the September. 1st Planning Board hearing, I submitted extensive written comments. When this. Rezoning application was approved by the Planning Board and the Land Use Transportation and Infrastructure Committee meetings. Despite my and others objections, I began to explore what else could be done to express our opposition. Since no. Range View registered neighborhood organization meeting has been held. With regard to this. Rezoning application, no official R.A. position statement or comments. Could be filed. Circulating a protest petition appeared to be the only way left to demonstrate the level of my and my neighbors opposition to this unjustified rezoning application. A neighbor and I gathered signatures of 23 owners. Of. More than 20% of the land area within. 200 feet outside. The 1090 South Dayton property and. Hand-Delivered this petition to council. Also want to address comments. Tonight that there has been no good neighbor agreement. Inexplicably, just days before the September. 14th. Land Use Transportation and Infrastructure Committee meeting. We learned the council office had. Asked mediation specialist Steve Charbonneau to reach out to. Mediate a resolution. Well, what is there to mediate? During both. The planning. Board and. The committee meetings. There were multiple reminders. That this application is. About the rezoning of the. Property and the free. Zone. There is no guarantee a swim club will actually be built there. The CPD staff report states that OSP mainly allows. Cultural special purpose parks and open space. Uses some. Educational, civic entertainment and recreation. Uses. And some institutional and public and religious assembly uses. So we don't even have a clear understanding of what could be built here. Under this proposed rezoning. Until we can see. A detailed site. Plan and. Specifics. Of the actual. Proposed project. And there's some reasonable assurance of this proposed development. Not something entirely different will take place. There's no way to know what issues or. Concerns we may. Have, and therefore nothing to mediate with the applicants. The highly objectionable access to this property. Off our. Quiet residential neighborhood street is. Not within the applicant's. Control to negotiate. I hope you hear us. The people who actually. Live in this neighborhood and that. You vote tonight to deny this rezoning application, there's absolutely no justification to rezone this property. It's accurately zoned as an extension of our suburban residential neighborhood. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker this evening is Paul Miller. And we don't see a Paul Miller in the Zoom meeting, but we do have two phone callers. And so if you could raise your hand, Paul Miller, we'll get you into the queue. Hi. Can you hear me? Yes. Hi. My name is Paul Miller and my Denver home is at 90,004. You adjacent to the 1090 South Dayton property. I received a flier from the Skinners postmarked May eight. It said that they were writing to introduce an exciting project proposal for our district, a seasonal outdoor swim club. The second paragraph led neighbors to believe this would be a community pool and open space for our neighborhood residents to use. As it said, our vision is to develop a new community focal point that would include an open air pool, children's ward, dep area, greenspace and community space for gatherings. The fliers said they would be on site at 6 p.m. on May 20th to share their plan to preserve greenspace and promote recreational use and surrounding neighborhood. Most people who received this flier came away with the impression that this is a proposal for a pool and open space for community use, not a private member only facility and did not even bother to go to the informal onsite meet and greet. My wife and I did attend, but the Schooners told attendees that no site plan was available and that the city would tell them where the access would be to the property. At that time, I and most other residents also didn't understand that rezoning of this property doesn't guarantee that the proposed swim club would actually go in or be built. Now that something else has been identified and potentially less desirable could be built under OSB zoning or have an idea that the point of access to this property is from our residential south and history, and not from East Mississippi or South Dayton. Despite being told that a range view registered neighborhood organization meeting was going to be held in May and subsequent requests for a meeting by some of my neighbors no are in the meeting has been held to address this rezoning application. Instead, it has been left up to the individual neighbors such as myself, to learn the facts. In my opinion, this rezoning application is somewhat disingenuous and misleading and includes unsupported claims to make their case. There's absolutely no community need or unfulfilled demand that justifies changing the current zoning of this property. Changing the current zoning of this property will degrade or normally quiet neighborhood. I did submit detailed written comments last week, but also wanted to explain that I believe far more people who live in our neighborhood would have expressed their opposition sooner had they not been misled. Thank you very much, Council. Thank you. Our next speaker this evening is joining us virtually as well, Jessie Paris. Yes. Good evening. Member of the council. Can I be her? Yes. My name is Jessica Sampras and I'm representing Black Sox to move for self-defense. How's the Mexican-American salsa changed? Was the Unity Party of Colorado in a front line? Black males. And I'll be there next November in 2023. I reside in District eight and Christopher Hernandez district. I'm against this proposal tonight for all the reasons that the speakers previous to me have spoken just did not get proper approval from the Arnolds. There's no neighborhood agreements. There's no guarantee that this is going to be a swimming pool or club. There was one speaker in opposition, a planning board. There are 15 letters of opposition. And 69 residents and signed a letter of opposition. So I agree with Jackie on Tony and John that this is not a good thing for this neighborhood. So I would ask that you not vote in favor of this rezoning tonight for 21, 1030. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Linda Rhea. Lenny Ray, can you hear me? Yes. Thank you for allowing me to testify. My name is Linda Ray. I live at. 940 South Emporia. And I have. Submitted written testimony. And so I will let that stand. And I'm here primarily to answer any questions you may have about that. But I certainly want to emphasize the points made by the earlier participants who talked about how misleading this has been, how rushed, how truncated in terms of our being able to get information. It has been a very exasperating experience and it did. Not need to be that way. So I will let my comments stand as written, and I'm just available to answer any questions. Thank you. Thank you. Our last speaker is Tess Dougherty. I'm sorry, did you did you call in? Yes, you can. Go ahead. Oh. I'm so sorry. Okay. So I think I think I put down that I was opposed. I guess I actually don't I don't necessarily have an opinion on the one way or another. I mean, I just haven't really made up my mind. But but I just think that, um. That. The outcome of this decision tonight will be pretty telling, given that the DiNardo hearing, if I remember correctly, it was about that part of the meeting was about 4 hours long because of how many people testified against the development. And you all went ahead and approved it anyway. And so, you know, it would just it'll just be pretty interesting to see how how this zoning application, the outcome of it, given the the protest letters and who you listen to in the city city council. And I hope that I hope that all the residents protesting I you know, we hear you in District nine. We do. We hear your we hear your frustration. And I just I would just implore I would just hope. And I invite you to to to join us because, you know, we've we've these zoning applications, these types of decisions that are made without community input. These are the types of things that happen week after week in District nine. And to this part of the city and and this city council tends to just ignore that, to ignore the residents and to go ahead with the development, the unfettered development that and the mayor's agenda here in Denver. And and it's pretty it's pretty gross. It's pretty it's pretty traumatic and inhumane. And and this happens all the time. And so I would just invite you to to join other other districts, other people in other districts of the city who who are also experiencing something similar. At the same time, I do think that that oftentimes resisting development is a form of is a is a form of, you know, preserving the status quo in a city that needs more, that needs, you know, vacant land is a pretty hot commodity. And people, you know, people like other people in other neighborhoods need to kind of be willing to to also take on that some of that burden that's been disproportionately placed on certain neighborhoods in the city. So, you know, I think that I as a as a former lifeguard, I think I think swimming is fun. So. And I would I would say that at no zoning, do do we ever know or have a guarantee of what the development is going to be? So this your your experience is not unlike any zoning. The site plans don't happen until after the zoning is. And so they're not voting on the site plans tonight. They make that very clear. And that indeed is part of their reasoning sometimes for why they vote in opposition of the of the of this residents. Thank you. That concludes our speakers this evening. Questions from members of Council on Council Bill 1030 and we have council member soil here. Thanks, Madam President. Thank you for being here. So can you. Explain what would be allowed? What forms would be allowed on the USA? What I say. Which is or is. I'm sorry. ASU eyesight, which is what it is now. Yeah. So it would allow the suburban house building form, but you could do a variety of uses. So obviously single unit, but you could also do like a library for example, is allowed in that district, but it would have to be within the suburban house building form. Got it. Okay. So if it's zone to OSB. Then what could go on that site, assuming that the swimming pool idea falls to pieces and then it's just risen to OSB with nothing there? Yep. So the general building form is the only building form permitted in OSB, but it allows for. Actually, I can pull up. I have a slide that shows the differences between SC I and I see an OSB. That'd be great, if you don't mind. Yeah. Yeah. So you can see the it does allow for about five feet greater height, but the setbacks are greater in OSB so they have to be 20 feet from the sides rear front versus they're just five feet from the sides and see why. And then they use uses. I've highlighted the ones that are different. So the main differences is as you I would allow for like residences, residential care as well as like a postal facility and then OSB would permit a cemetery, museum, arts, recreational entertainment, parking garage and then agricultural uses. Okay. In addition to. To all the other. Yeah. But all the other ones that are not bold are the ones that are the same that are. But. Okay, I understand what you're saying. So. So in if I'm looking at this properly, in the ACP side, you still have communities that are daycare, library, open space, all of those included on the OSB side as well, in addition to these other ones. Yep. Okay. I see what you're saying. And so let me just make sure I understand and it's and it's super clear to me. So the primary st setbacks are the same. Correct. Both of those own districts. But the setbacks for the side street and the interior, 15 feet more. Per. Side. Correct. And I would additionally add, although I know we don't speak about specific projects, but what they're proposing would have to actually be 50 feet. The an outdoor pool, an outdoor use like that would have to be 50 from any residential use. Okay. So the if they're if they do get this rezoning and they do have a pool that they end up putting on this, what does that mean for like for the parking lot? Right. So if there's a parking lot, does the step back on the parking lot then have to be that 20. Feet on all. Sides as. Well? That's a this is for the building. A structure would have to be 20 feet. But the parking I don't know. I would have to get back to you on that. Do you know that by any chance? Sorry, dude. I'm sorry, Councilwoman, I missed the question. So as we're looking at the difference between the two zone districts on this slide, the side street setbacks and the interior setbacks are 15 feet greater in the Osby zoning than they are in the assessed zoning. So I'm I understand that that is for the building form. Is that also true for, say, a parking lot if this pool ends up being built there, if they get the rezoning. The parking lot would not have the same setback as as a structure. Okay. So is that something that can be negotiated in a good neighbor agreement? Yeah. There would be like build to requirements and particular landscaping requirements that the applicant would still have to meet. So that might provide a buffer, but it wouldn't necessarily be the same as a setback. Got it. Okay. So and so since you mentioned like landscaping, is that something that could be negotiated and a good neighbor agreement? Yes. And the parking setback of the parking lot is something that could also be negotiated in a good neighbor agreement. Yes. Okay. What other kinds of stuff could be negotiated in that kind of agreement. In a good neighbor agreement? You know, the neighbors and the applicant can work through just about anything. I mean, that's that's really sort of the foundation of zoning is that folks got together and they said, oh, we like this particular area and we don't like that. Or that's how they that's how you come up with setbacks and what type of uses are allowed and all that. So I mean, it, it would be privately enforced. So there is any number of items that that is on the table when it comes to good neighbor agreements. Got it. Okay. And how many times have we seen I think this is probably for Libby. Thank you so much. How many times have we seen applications or sites? Councilwoman, can I interrupt you for just a second? We didn't really get need to introduce himself for the record. Oh, and so I know you said his name, but wanted to, since the public is watching. Excuse me for interrupting. No, no. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, sir. Assistant city attorney. All right. Great. Thank you. Go ahead, Councilman. So I know that there's been several attempts to do something on this land. How many times has this potential site plan come through? Yeah. So I believe this is the first formal application, but in the pre-op stage there were about seven perhaps. So there are seven potential developments that have been tried on this land, and not one of them has made it past the upstage except for open space. Correct? Okay. Can we talk a little bit about the street access issue? You mentioned it like you touched on it a little bit, but I guess I need to make sure that I understand very clearly exactly what kinds of decisions or what information daddy uses when they are determining where ingress and egress would need to go on a parcel. Yeah. So I think Matt Farman is on the call. He's one of our data engineers, so he may be best equipped to answer that question. Thank you. Hey, Matt. Yeah. Okay. All right? Yeah. My name's Matt Farman. I work for Development Services, dot transportation, so I review private development as it relates to the right of way. So I permit the right of way design next to private development. And generally speaking, on this one, the city wants to have access off the lowest classified street as possible. And so Mississippi Avenue is an arterial roadway. Dayton's a collector in Emporia is a local. So Emporia is the local hair loss classified street and part of the reason for that. So we don't want access off of arterials. Think of that like a highway. We want that to get people from point A to point B and then your collector roadways are kind of your in between roadways to get people to local roadways where ideally access is taken off of. So when the development came in and proposed a plan, they had an access off Emporia. And then we look at that and compare that to our policy standards and requirements to see if that meets what the city could approve. And in this case, it met the requirements that we would want to see from. Hmm. Is there some? Would it be possible for in a neighborhood agreement to make the determination that the ingress and egress should be off Dayton instead of Emporia? Is that like is that allowed? You know, I'm not sure as that directly relates to the good neighbor agreement, but we do have. So the way our department works, plans are proposed and then we we comment on those. We, the city would be happy to look at another plan with access at in a different place. But I couldn't guarantee, you know, that that that would be approved. But we also have a variance process that that can be appealed and that goes up to some upper level management to help make that call. But there's a lot of challenges with these other roads with arterial. Then you also have a traffic signal there. Okay. Great. So. And maybe this question is actually for the applicants then in terms of it, are they willing to propose a different area of ingress and egress off of Dayton as opposed to Emporia, which is where this original, I guess, site plan suggested that go? I'm sorry. That to the applicant or to. Yes. Can we please upgrade them? I think we're getting Joseph or Lydia Skinner moved over. Hi. This is Joseph and Lydia. District five, the applicant. So. So just to repeat it, I'm wondering whether I'm right, because there's in the way the city processes work, there's a difference between the rezoning and the site plan. If you were to get this rezoning, would you be willing to consider altering the site plan for ingress and egress on Dayton instead of Emporia. Right? Yes. So our original intention was to go off Dayton when we hired on our civil engineer team. They they reviewed all the city code and all that. And so they said to get this through planning, it needed to be done on Emporia. But we're more than happy to rereview this after after rezoning, just the cost burden for us to do that. Now, prior to rezoning in that short amount of time that we were kind of given notification that might be an issue was was a bit too too heavy on us. Okay. And that's good to know. Thank you. I appreciate it. Did you consider any other zone district? Is there? Maybe this is even. Well, let me ask this first. Did you consider any other zone districts when you were considering this free zone? There were several zone districts that what our intention was could fit under. But knowing kind of what we were after, and that was to secure green space and secure recreation zone. I mean, it just it felt like any other way than OSP would be almost disingenuous, right? Like the worst case scenario as as it was brought up, what happens if this all falls through? Well, now it's designated OSP and it can only be used as a community asset, an open space asset, where if we would have gone with a mixed use or something along those lines, our design falls through, we sell the property and now, now you have a gas station there. So we pursued OSP all the way through because we felt that was the most accurate for what we were trying to do. Got it. Okay. I really appreciate that. Thank you so much. And then last question, I guess, for you guys as the applicants or the Skinners, do you? Would you be willing to consider going to mediation and hammering out a good neighbor agreement if this rezoning is approved? As you get to the site plan stage. Absolutely. Absolutely. We were we were wanting to engage in mediation, to go over the traffic concerns and issues before we even got here. I mean, in talking with a few neighbors who would drive by where we were setting up signs, that sounded like a lot of them weren't completely aware of, you know, that it was going to be seasonal, that there wasn't a be there year round. Right. What what everything entailed. It just felt like there was a lot of misinformation. And so we were pushing for mediation so we could explain the traffic that we already have a signed agreement or if something were to go in joint use agreement with the challenge school across the street to help, you know, drastically ease the traffic concerns by utilizing the 100 plus parking lot during the summer. So we just never felt like we were given the opportunity and we were really pushing Steve to kind of get everybody conversing. But it sounded like that just wasn't it wasn't a high priority for the other party. Okay. Did you attempt to do any other outreach to the community in terms of other meetings or things like that? I know you had that one. Would you be willing to do more than that if you were to get this rezoning? Absolutely. This is Lydia speaking, Councilwoman Sawyer. So we would definitely be open to speaking at a scheduled range view and neighborhood association meeting. One has not been scheduled that we're aware of from the duration that we've been up against for this rezoning. I think, you know, addressing a broader group would definitely be beneficial to, you know, not have any sort of. You know, take all night just to be able to get the messaging out once and for all, kind of what we're about that we really see this as an asset. We also are members of District five where husband and wife no larger organization. So it's it's a lot more straightforward, I think, than than it has been interpreted as. And we're happy to do that. Q Thanks so much, Madam President. Do you council member Sawyer. Next up, we've got Councilmember Black. Thank you, Madam President. I have a really quick question for you, Libby. So on the staff report, it says the lot is 84,000 square feet and the minimum lot size in as you eye is 12,000 feet. So they could put seven houses there, is that correct? Potentially. Given how they configure it? Yeah. Okay. Just want to get a feel for the size of the lot. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Councilmember Black. Next up, we've got Councilmember Flynn. Thank you, Madam President, but I really was quick. Councilwoman Black caught me off guard. I am flustered a little bit by the bodies. Decision that you can only access this parcel from Emporia which is the the residential side of the. Of the lot. Because I look along Mississippi I see that there was a proposal to rezone. Down at the corner on Geneva. That was, I believe, failed in June, but I didn't see any. Similar remarks by Dotty then in fact, there was an existing driveway right off of Mississippi for that. And then just to the west of this, there's an existing entrance into a parking lot for the school, which of course is in Arapahoe County. So Dottie had no say over whether there was access there. But I know of similar, you know, arterials and then neighborhood collector streets that have driveways on them. So I'm struggling with the notion that if there's a commercial enterprise like a private swim club, to be accommodated by this rezoning as open space, be private open space that the customers, the paying customers can only access it from by winding through the neighborhood and going down a residential street to get into the parking lot. Would I'm sorry, was it. Mark Matt. Matt from Dottie. Could you further explain the thinking behind that? And I know that we sometimes update our standards. We change what we used to do because many of us up here on the dais have asked for things in our district, traffic controls and things like that, and we might see them widely used elsewhere. And they say we don't do that anymore. So I'm wondering what is the what is the thinking here about not allowing in access off of date or Mississippi? Because that seems to be a hindrance to the development of this property. Excuse me, Frank. And frankly, I'm not interested in things that keep traffic speeding on Mississippi. This is not a words. We don't want to put a driveway there because we we don't want to slow down the traffic behind a right turning vehicle. Yeah. I can help clarify that a little bit further. And, and I guess I just wanted to start off by saying, you know, Dottie didn't necessarily say. For sure it needs to be off in. We're just going off of a proposed plan and then looking at our standards so in excess of Emporia would meet all of our standards and current practices. You know, part of the some of the things that we look at, we really try to avoid access to arterial roadways, Mississippi, Dayton, here, where it's close to a traffic signal. And we don't want to have access that is too close to the traffic signal where you have tubing that backs up. And then we also don't want it where there's turn lanes. So and then you have an access across the street and for Denver Vision Zero. We really like to have access aligned and other things we look at or conflict points with pedestrians. So if you have an access on Dayton, you would have more conflict points with cars going over the sidewalk, with people walking up, you know, to the school. So there would be less conflict points off in Peoria as well. And, you know, it's hard to say, you know, what was improved in the past with access off the Mississippi, I can't really speak to that. But current practices, this is what the city pushes for. Because he had change from prior practice. And I guess I have a little I have a little bit of difficulty. Understanding why we continue to have practices in some parts of town that we don't do anymore. But the ones that already exist where they seem to function. Well, I just I'm just flustered by this. I guess I have to take that into consideration. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilmember Flynn. Libby, did you want to say something? Well, I was going to say that I don't want that particular property down Mississippi. I don't know if it had a potential to be accessed from a different street, but sometimes it did okay. Because obviously that's only has one street frontage, then access would probably need to be permitted even if it's an arterial. But since this one has three options, that's why looking at the lowest classification is the most in line with Vision Zero. All right. Great. Thank you. Next up, we've got Councilmember Cashman. Thank you very much. I will say it feels like this is not really fully baked as far as one meeting with the community and no community benefits agreement in place concerns me to make room for a profit making business. And, you know, the use is an interesting use. I'd love it if it were Denver building a community pool. I would say that would be outstanding. I wonder what other under the existing zoning, what profit making businesses could move in. Yeah. So, you know, you could do a community center under the existing zoning that includes a pool, but that would need to be a like not for profit organization that runs it. So impact on the ground would be very similar to what's being proposed. But as far as a profit making business, you know, I'm trying to pick a school. I mean, maybe a private school, for example, would be although most of those are probably still non-profits as far as how they're registered. But most of them would need to be a nonprofit. Uses under the existing district. Mm hmm. Okay. Yeah, I guess I don't need to hammer the same subject as Councilman Flynn, but I wonder about the access. And, I mean, it's not his words, but it does sound like staff is pretty set on Emporia being the access point. I hear a willingness. Yeah, we can talk about it, but I'm not hearing that there would be much chance of other access being developed. And I guess I would say there's there's no guarantees. And I think I don't know of an actual proposal has been made that Matt has reviewed along Dayton Street. So I think it'd be challenging to speak. Sure, I would be approve and. I understand that. I guess I would just be more comfortable with the Community Benefits Agreement signed on on this use. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilman Cashman. And next up, we've got Councilmember Ortega. Thank you, Madam President. My first question is for Lydia or Joseph Skinner. I wanted to ask if you have an idea of what percentage of the lot the pool actually take up. And then how many parking spaces does that actually give you? Or I can address that. Lydia here. So we have a rough proposal right now. It's still in draft form, but I believe it was only 37 or so percent of the entire approximately two acres of land because this is an outdoor swim club. The requirements for parking are a bit different. I believe that when we spoke with Dottie previously, the requirement would be based on the building size. We have a footprint, proposed footprint of approximately 2500 square feet, which is equivalent roughly to a single family home as our pool building. And so for that size of the building, the required number of parking is actually only seven parking spaces. Right now, our draft includes obviously a lot more. Right now we have, I think, around 50 parking spots proposed along Dayton. And then with that joint use agreement with the Challenge School, which we would, you know, obviously finalized once we zoned and go into development, would be additional 100 parking spaces. So we have more than adequately addressed the parking based on the requirement. And you indicated that the pool would be open from May to September, right? That is correct. Memorial Day to Labor Day is the standard for swim clubs here in Denver. Outdoor swimming obviously is very seasonal here. So there would be no chance of it being open outside of that because it would definitely ruin the pool and infrastructure. So sometimes school starts before Labor Day. And so just wanted to get your thoughts about the additional spaces that you're talking about. If you have kids from the neighborhood. I don't know what the schedule is at the school, but you're referencing the challenge school if they're on the same schedule as the schools or not. And so if if they're not on the same schedule, just wanting to to figure out if parking is really going to be an issue that might push parking into the neighborhood. If it turns out that you're going to have a lot of traffic in and out, and I would suspect in most cases parents are going to drop their kids off and then come and come up if they're not required to be present with them while they're swimming. Yes, that's a great question. And so to answer this question, we're going to base it off. You know, our experience here in the Virginia Vale neighborhood, right across from our neighborhood is the Virginia Bay Swim Club. It's actually how we got the idea for this, the swim club, our own. And so what we've seen over the last five, four or five years of living here is that the 66, I believe, spaces at the Virginia Bay Swim Club has is more than adequate on any normal day of the year. Now, there are days like the 4th of July and Labor Day itself, where there is quite a lot of overflow from those 66 spaces. And so that's why we proactively went ahead and did the challenge pool joint use agreement for the worst case. You know, anticipation of of traffic, fourth July weekends are always a little bit heavier. But on the average weekday, I mean, we've done a handful of times and there's at most, you know, dozens of families. So one point I'd like to. Add on that is that unlike school, which has a very set start time and end time, the probability of members of the pool coming all at the same time is highly improbable. People would trickle in and out throughout the entire day as opposed to the school, which is, you know, probably an hour of time between in the morning as well as in the afternoon when it's the highest volume. So the volume that our proposals would contribute would be a lot more spaced out. I didn't notice if the joint you took agreement was part of the application. Is that something that was included or is that something you're planning to use down the road? The Joint Use Agreement was entered as an artifact, so we have had written confirmation that they want to enter into one without one. We are still under contract on the parcel and our close is contingent on a successful rezoning it. But until we can do that as owners, we can't really come or have any finalized agreements with them, but they have expressed written interest and obviously if this is successfully revoked, resigned, we will engage on that front and have something. More formal drafted. Okay. Thank you. I have no further questions. All right. Thank you. Councilmember Ortega, we've got Councilmember Canete. You're up next. Thank you. Council president. I guess my first question is for Nate Lucero. Nate. You know, there were some. Questions asked earlier about nonprofit versus for profit. And I just want to get clear on the law. When we are considering a zoning, are we allowed to consider who the applicant is? Is that a legal criteria we're allowed to consider? No, it's not. It doesn't matter. Okay. So there's no it would not be a legal basis to say, well, I would like a pool if so-and-so owned it, but not if another person owned it. We would be we're supposed to be considering the use or the the appropriateness of the zoning based on the the five criteria. Yes. Right. It's not part of the five criteria. The only thing that has to be considered and this is vetted before it even gets to council, is whether or not the applicant is is an appropriate entity or person to initiate the applicant. So in other words, it's either the property owner or a member of city council or council as a whole or the manager of CPD. Okay. Thank you for that clarification. My next question and. I don't remember. If we have someone in the on line who is representing the Range View Neighborhood Association, I heard questions or concerns from colleagues about the fact that there wasn't a more neighborhood meetings, but I want to clarify whose responsibility it is to convene a neighborhood meeting. And so I just want to clarify whether or not we have someone from the Range View Neighborhood Association in the meeting. I am not aware that we do or not. But if you are a member of the Rain View Neighborhood Association, if you raise your hand and we can bring you into the queue to answer Councilwoman Nature's question, and if you wouldn't mind introducing yourself for the record and your involvement with them. Okay. Hello. I'm Linda Rea and I am now a former. A former board member of our R.A. And what has happened in this case. Was the applicants began a conversation. With our existing. Board president. And. He began talking about having a meeting, and I had multiple emails. And phone calls trying to get in our own R.A. meeting, because it was my view that the board is to convene the body. Let the body discuss the matter at hand and come up with a position. And instead, what happened was the applicants took the board president's enjoyment of his private swim club as being good for this neighborhood and have presented it as his support means. We support it. We were never asked. We tried and tried to get conversations with our our whole R.A. We. Tried to get. A dialog through our council member to ask the applicant. To come and meet with us so that we. Could have a forthright, amicable, discussed discussion about this. And instead we've been sidelined. So there's a lot. Of resentment that's built up in this neighborhood about the manner in which this has been conducted. There's a lot of misinformation. There is no understanding by our board because they don't live on this side of the. Neighborhood that. The parking lot at the school does not. Work. Now it has. 128 parking spaces. I'm going to go ahead and ask you to pause. I think we've gotten that point across. And Councilmember, can each of you want to go ahead and put. I sorry. You were going a little further in my scope of my question. I hear your frustration that the neighborhood didn't meet. I also heard the applicant's frustration that the neighborhood didn't meet. I don't know that we can hold an applicant responsible for an R.A. that refused to meet. Right. I am very empathetic to what you just described, but it's also, I think, beyond the scope. And so, again, if if the staff would like to correct me, we don't have a letter from this R.A. in this packet. That is correct. So if we are voting tonight, none of us would be voting based on evidence that the R.A. supports it because we have no such evidence. Correct. So what may have happened in the community and what buzz there may have been, I just want to assure folks is not in the record and would not be part of our decision. But it also can't be part of our decision that because the R.A., because they didn't meet with the R.A., I'm hearing testimony from both sides that they would have liked it and that that that's what I take from the record. I have just one more question. It's a little bit unusual, but Madam President, feel indulge me. I have a question for Councilman Herndon. I think he's down there. But several of our colleagues have mentioned they're surprised at the standard about not being willing to have ingress and egress from, you know, collectors. I'm sorry, you know, arterials, but I recall many zoning is in the past and I believe you had when Councilman Herndon the affordable housing and Central Park and MLK if I believe it and if you don't remember, it's okay because you're not on the staff seat tonight. But Councilman Herndon, have you had a rezoning. Where we discussed this. This matter where there was consternation but the standard had been in place for a while. Was this is this ring any bells for you? Council? I'm thinking of affordable housing and off of MLK. Are you referring to the apartments on Moline? Yeah. Well, this is the. It's still undeveloped, as, in fact, it's the parcel that was on the corner of southeast corner of Central Park and MLK across from the open space. It is still undeveloped today and it was a subject of a rezoning here. Yes. And this issue was was discussed at length, if I recall, correct? Yes. They so if you're not familiar, the intersections of Central. Park and Martin Luther King Boulevard, the South. Yeah. Councilman can is correct. There are questions about where the egress is going to happen. And they did not do it on Martin Luther King. And I have to go back, but I'm under the assumption for the reasons that we're talking about right now, the and the egress for that would be on the local street, I believe. But as Councilman Kennedy said, we have not seen what I have not seen, I should say, a development plan as of late. But I believe what Councilman King needs to talk about is correct. All right. Thank you. I'll save the rest of your comments. But thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilmember each and Councilmember Herndon for weighing in here. We got some folks coming back into the queue. And so we've got and we see they're switching around here. Council Member Sawyer or actually Councilmember Herndon, were you in the queue for? I did, yes. Councilmember Sawyer. Since you've already been up. Councilmember Herndon. Thank you. Kelly This is a question. Just understanding outreach, because this is what we're spending a lot of time on. Is there anything in your view that the applicants did not do when it comes to their responsibility for outreach for this rezoning? No. Okay. Thank you. And for the applicants. A quick question it seems in. It's okay. Are you aware of any individuals that we're trying to connect with you that you wouldn't you were not willing to meet with? That's not what I am sensing from the conversations that you had, but I just wanted to ask you that question. Like you seemed very willing to have multiple conversations about this. Just let me know that. Is I misinterpreting that. That's an accurate statement. We spoke with anyone who wanted to engage with us. No one reached out to us directly. But when we were posting signs for both the hearings and folks we're driving by, we answered the questions and introduced the pathologist and any questions they had at the time. And I will state that back in May when we reached out to the Range View President. We had one one resident reach out to us directly first before the President responded. We responded that we would like to go to the Range View Neighborhood Association kind of chain so everybody could be discussed in the initial proposal. But after that, we've been quite open to discussion with any, any individual or group. Thank you for that. Most everything else. I have a comment, so I am good. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilmember Herndon. And wanted to do a quick check. Colleagues are everybody's good with their questions at this point. All right. Not seeing anybody else in the queue. The public hearing is closed. Comments by members of Council on Council Bill 1030. Councilmember Sawyer. Thanks, Madam President. This is a tough one, right? I would also feel better if there was a neighborhood agreement in place. That's why my council office repeatedly reached out to the neighborhood organization, to the neighbors themselves, to the Skinners, to try and get them together to hammer out a good neighbor agreement. I'm concerned about the fact that there isn't a good neighbor agreement here. However, the neighbors have had ample and repeated opportunity to create one and have refused to the point where several of them did not even respond at all. That is concerning because, you know, I think we've seen this a couple of times now where when you're looking at a protest position or you're looking at next door, people are lying to their neighbors about what's going on in order to get what they want. And that's not okay. And so, you know, we talked about this in a previous District five rezoning with CPD, and I think we need to talk about it again because I think what needs to happen here, based on repeated experience with this, is that whatever protest, petition or whatever language is put out there about exactly what the rezoning is has to be metered by the city attorney's office and CPD when it's put out. You cannot lie to your neighbors and then to get what you want in our rezoning process and exploit that whole. And also, you can't refuse to negotiate in some, you know, or even respond when negotiation is openly offered and then say that you weren't engaged. That is not okay. It's not okay. So. Right, we've talked about this. The land is vacant. There have been seven attempts to develop here. Seven. This is the eighth. None of those attempts have been successful. And the reason behind these failures, it's kind of interesting. You know, some of the neighborhood doesn't want the increase of density that comes with an SMU three or an SMU five, which would be appropriate here. Some of the neighborhood doesn't want the change of use that would come with an x three or in some x five zone district here. We saw this at the Mississippian Geneva rezoning. You know, just this past summer. So so what do we do here? You know, does this parcel stay empty forever? If the underlying SSI zoned district was appropriate for this property, that seven houses, so that seven for profit houses that a developer would be able to develop on that land. It would have been successfully developed by now if it was going to be supported in one of these past seven attempts. But it hasn't. So that's an indication, I think, that a zoning change is needed here. You know, so the question is, is OSB zoning the right zoning to go on this land? I understand that there's concerns about parking and street access. And, you know, as we've discussed, we've attempted to send it to mediation repeatedly. That would have been the place for neighbors to negotiate on these kinds of issues like entry and exit location, hours and days of operation, which I frankly think is going to end up being a bigger problem if we end up rezoning the parcel than the parking or the ingress and egress off of any street, you know, those kinds of things. Priority for neighbors living in the Range View Neighborhood Association. That's something that could be put into a good neighbor agreement if the neighbors were willing to mediate. It's not an appropriate tactic to refuse to mediate in the hopes of stopping a rezoning. So, you know, what are we what are we going to do here? I don't know. Right. I think the most important point that needs to be made in this situation is that our rezoning criteria doesn't look at the use of the property. So, you know, again, we're about to is OSB an appropriate zoned district for this property? And what does that mean? OSB is, and I'm quoting here, intended to protect and promote open space and parks not otherwise owned, operated or leased by the city, and generally intended for active or passive recreation use. So like were thinking kind of about this a different way. You know, the swim club doesn't work out. Is this OSB good for the neighbors, good for the community, good for the city? We're not just going to develop to develop for develop sake. We're going to develop because it's adding some sort of community benefit here. Parks and open space, I think are critical in any neighborhood. And this neighborhood has no city park except for a portion of the Highline Canal. There's a neighborhood directly north of the Highline Canal Park Forest where Ben Bezos Park is. That's not range view. The different neighborhood. So no park here at all. In fact, of all the neighborhoods I represented, District five, Windsor as a whole has the least amount of parks and open space. So by changing the zoning from suburban to open space, we're insuring a portion of this neighborhood remains dedicated to open space, recreation or some sort of community serving use. It's something that not only meets the goals of these supporting plans that we look at, but the actual needs of the neighborhood. I I'm very conflicted because I really, like I said, wish that there was a good neighbor agreement in place here. I think that that would have been the thing that would have really and truly sealed the deal on ensuring that the neighborhood truly benefited from this. But there's time. Right. We have the whole site review time to come back. So, you know, mediation is not off the table. I know the Skinners would be willing to do it. I know my office has repeatedly made the offer to sponsor it for free. That's still on the table. If we end up rezoning this, first of all, and it goes through the site plan process so that these kinds of issues could still be hammered out. And so I've got to look at the five criteria and this rezoning meets the criteria. So I'm gonna be supporting intimate thinks that I'm president. Thank you, Councilmember Sawyer. Next up, we've got Councilmember Kinney. Thank you. Council president I to find that the criteria have been met tonight and I guess in particular, you know, to imply that our city could have, you know, residential neighborhoods but not have amenities that serve them, such as pools or community centers or daycares. Some of the other uses in this list, we just couldn't function as a city. And so I think that it also in particular in terms of plan, conformance rate, the need for complete neighborhoods, right? Not just places people live, but places they can recreate or work or do. The other things that we have to do in our lives. We don't just live at home when we're not in a pandemic. Right. So so I find the criteria are met. But I wanted to chime in for for two reflections just on the discussion. I think that I'm concerned because this issue, you know, I brought up Councilman Herndon's rezoning because the same issue did come up. Everyone wanted the traffic to come off of Central Park or MLK instead of from the side street. I think Councilman Torres has had this issue in her district. I know Councilwoman Sandoval has. And I think that to the extent that our council has concerns about where curb cuts are going and why, I think it's incumbent upon us to take it up with our Department of Transportation not to be considering or not considering rezonings because of it. It is done to reduce traffic incidents, rate pedestrian car traffic incidents, bike car traffic incidents and car car traffic incidents. If we don't believe the science, if we don't understand the science, then I think the place to take it up is there. But it concerns me that it keeps showing up as a potential basis to affect a rezoning. And I just think that I have to raise the policy issue that if we are not in agreement with our Department of Transportation about curb cuts, then we should take it up directly and not have it be playing out in these rezoning conversations. The second thing is just, you know, it's really I think about. If we. Had to build schools in our city, would we have even been able to do it? I mean, the second issue that keeps coming up in every rezoning is cars. You know, there's going to be cars, there's going to be people. And I think schools are described in every one of these rezoning discussions as a as a as a terrible imposition and a real disruptor to neighborhoods. But they educate our kids. And the kids. Have to get there. And yes, in the olden. Days, perhaps everyone walked to school. But we now have ECD. That begins at three age three. And we also have school choice, which means kids can go to a neighborhood, neighborhood school or a school that fits them better, maybe because it has specialized ESL programs or because it has a a science, technology and math program that they need. And I just I. Worry that. That I can't imagine how we would build the things that our city needs based on how we describe the things everything is is an imposition and or a harm. Right. That schools are a harm to neighborhoods. Like, I would like us to step back and just think about that, that we describe these things like pools and schools as harms. And. And, you know, the kids don't get to. Come and talk to us. The kids don't get to come and testify to us. Generally speaking, we're hearing from adults, mostly disproportionately homeowners. Right. You know, who especially relies on recreational amenities, people who live in apartments or who don't have, you know, yards of their own. They especially need these kinds of spaces. I speak for a neighborhood that does not have it has its first park, the Fairfax Park in North Park Hill. But other than that, the only thing around is schools. And yeah, they generate traffic and they also educate kids and they provide a place for community to gather and support our community. So. I just wanted to share those reflections before we move on. I know that we care deeply about each of the comments we hear, but I also think it's really important for us, particularly on the dais, to step back and think about the big picture needs of the city and why the zoning code has some of the criteria it has. I see uniformity of zone district here. We've approved many projects on major arterials that aren't going to get curb cuts. Right. Uniformity. Right. We're we're doing that uniformly in other places, too. So with that, I'll be supporting this tonight. Thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Canete. And I appreciate both of my colleagues comments and the discussion. And I'm in full support of this rezoning. I can't imagine this council voting down something that is open space zoning, especially given the community gaps that we're seeing in this area. And, you know, even if you are a Denver Parks and Rec recreation holder permit, you still have to pay to use the pool. There are still costs involved with it. It's not like if the city was building this, it would be free either. And so I am in full support of this tonight. And a reminder to my colleagues that since community planning and development has determined that the requirement for a legal protest has been met. It will require ten affirmative votes instead of the standard seven affirmative votes of council to pass this bill. Madam Secretary, roll call on Council Bill 1030, please. Ortega. I heard. Sandoval. I. Sawyer I. Torres, I. Black eye. CdeBaca. I can't. I. When I. Herndon I can. All right. Cashman. I can each time, Madam President. I. Madam Secretary, close the voting and announce the results. 13 Eyes. 13 Eyes Council Bill 20 1-1030 has passed. Thank you to the community members and Libby and Nate for being here with us. Moving on, Councilmember Cashman, we put Council Bill 1072 on the floor for final passage.

Recommendation to declare ordinance amending the Use District Map of the City of Long Beach as said Map has been established and amended by amending portions of Part 10 of said Map from Community Commercial Automobile-Oriented (CCA) to Community R-4-N (CCN), read and adopted as read. (District 2)

LongBeachCC_04132021_21-0277

Thank you. Item number 16, please. Report from Development Services Recommendation to declare ordnance amending the use district map of the City of Long Beach by amending portions of part ten of said map from community commercial automobile oriented to community are for end read and adapted as read district to. Can I, can I get a motion in the second quarter of a motion by Councilman Allen? Can I get a second, please? Second by Councilwoman Mongo. Uh, let's see. I don't think I have any. There's no public. Comment. Okay, great. So let's go ahead and go to a roll call vote. District one I, District two. I. District three. I. District four. All right. District five. I. District six. District six. She. She got an. Audition. District seven. I. District eight. I. District nine. All right. Motion carries.